Victims of Domestic Abuse lose enough, without losing their Vote too - updated

UPDATED 2023-05-19: The Voter ID requirements, introduced (na?vely or mendaciously, depending how generous you are in your interpretation[4]) by the current government, has an impact here. Obviously, these changes were vital, given the vast number[2] of cases of voter impersonation. However, denying ~1.2% of people the vote at the Polling Station has proven somewhat embarrassing[3]. I've added a paragraph about how this affects Anonymous Registration at the end.

In order to vote in the UK, you have to be on the Electoral Roll, a formal register of electors maintained by the local authorities. There are actually three different registers, each with different availability for viewing, each with different criteria for membership. Being on any of the three entitles you to vote.

The Open Register (“Edited Register” in Northern Ireland)

This is the Lazy Option?. Anyone who registers to vote, and then does nothing else, ends up on this register. Anyone can buy a copy of this register, and use it for marketing. Quite why anyone would not bother to opt out of this register, I’m really not sure, but only 50% of registered voters have done so. Opting out is simple – you can do it when you register or at any time after.

The Full Register

If you opt out of the Open Register, your details are not for sale, although certain organisations can access the Full Register – such as the major Credit Reference Agencies. However, your details are still actually public, because the Full Register is available in public libraries where anyone can consult it.

This gives a problem to victims of Domestic Abuse who may need the assurance that their address is not so easily discoverable for their safety and peace of mind. Until 2006, people in this situation had limited options: take the risk, or be unable to vote. The Electoral Administration Act of 2006 provided for a way to be able to vote without taking the risk, but the Act was far from perfect.

The Anonymous Register

Following formal acceptance of an attestation by a qualifying officer (defined in terms of Section 10 of the Electoral Administration Act 2006, amended in July 2018), those with genuine risks to their safety or well-being can be registered to vote without appearing on the Full Register either. There are a few impacts of which you should be aware – but none of these are as bad as the impacts of not being registered at all in the first place.

You get a Certificate of Anonymous Registration, which isn’t quite as useful as it sounds because it contains your address, but this explains these other impacts very clearly. Here’s mine.

The 2006 Act provided the mechanism by which one could get registered anonymously, but the “qualifying officers” were rather narrow in scope and generally inaccessible to people in this situation. Obviously, I take High Tea with the Head of the Security Service regularly[1] so this is not a barrier in my case, but most victims found this mechanism inaccessible. The amendments to the Act in July 2018 went a very long way to rectifying this, and makes the process realistically achievable if one is prepared to be persistent.

If you are granted Anonymous Registration, anyone else in the household old enough to be on the register (16, although they cannot vote until they reach 18) automatically gains the ability to be registered anonymously too - otherwise it would render the process pointless.

If anyone does find themselves in the unfortunate position of needing to do this, I’m happy to discuss and offer some pointers. It is the least I can do after being in this situation myself. Don't lose your vote on top of everything else.

2023 Addendum - Voter ID

The Voter ID regulations present some difficulty. If you are on the Anonymous Register, then your Polling Card posted to you contains your address and Roll ID but no name! This makes proving your identity something of a challenge.

Thus it has been necessary to introduce the Anonymous Elector's Document.

Applying for this is... messy. I've included redacted copies of the documentation because it is important to understand what a total ballache this process actually is.

Pro Tip: My advice is: Don't do this! Apply to vote by post instead. Problem side-stepped entirely, with the added bonus of not having to sample the locally circulating airborn and surface-carried viral strains.

Why This Really Sucks

Previously, even voting in person, you carried with you a Poll Card with your address but no name. If you lost it, you potentially revealed your address, but not (directly) your identity. Most discarded Poll Cards will not get a second glance, so there was a low probability of anyone even noticing the oddity of a Poll Card with NO NAME upon it.

Now, if you lose your Anonymous Elector's Document you have revealed:

1. Your address - no change
2. Your name - this is new extra information: your identity
3. Your image - this is new extra information: your likeness
4. All the above in a single document binding them together
5. All the above in a document clearly titled “Anonymous Elector's Document” drawing attention to exactly what is special about you

This compromises what WAS a well thought-out system which finely balanced the anonymity against minimum identifying information which was only of any use to the Electoral Officers at a Polling Station. It turns it into a system which can easily draw attention to precisely that to which you do not want attention drawn.

In conclusion: follow my advice above - vote by post, avoid the additional risks.

Footnotes

[1] Actually never, but they are welcome to drop me an invite any time!

[2] Actually ZERO instances, but hey don't let the facts get in the way eh?

[3] Measured by local volunteers at about 1.2% of those trying to vote - voting DENIED! Still vital to reduce that number in [2], some collateral damage inevitable yadda yadda. Although interesting that even the Minister for the 17th Century now thinks it was a bad idea (pronounced /?d??rim?nd?r??/, “gerrymandering”)

[4] All available evidence suggests the latter, especially statements by Ministers who supported it at the time but now admit it was basically attemted gerrymandering.