Why does Andy Burnham want to make electoral fraud easier?

In the latest policy proposals to come out of government, Prime Minister Andy Burnham is seeking to scrap the need for photo ID at polling stations, to lower the voting age to 16, and to limit political donations to a maximum of £500,000 – which change could be retroactively applied, we are told, to two recent donations to Reform UK from cryptocurrency billionaires Ben Delo and Christopher Harborne, amounting to some £72 million. Mr Burnham appears happy, however, for Labour to continue receiving donations from trades unions, which have reportedly topped £150 million since the millennium.

We are told this may be prelude to the announcement of an early General Election, and is all part of a Labour strategy to retain power. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen, but the proposals are a cause for concern, demonstrating as they do a seeming manipulation of democracy in order to prevent challenge. A manipulation that can only further undermine the identity, security, traditional values, and established faith of the UK.

Voter ID was first recommended by the Electoral Commission to counter fraud in 2014, and was formally introduced by the Conservatives in 2022 – specifically to prevent ‘personation’, someone voting in person on another’s behalf. Many are warning that should the need to show voter ID at polling stations now be removed, that risk will re-emerge. Which perhaps goes without saying, because allowing someone to show a bank card, or some such, with only the surname and initials included, would clearly allow anyone to claim to be that person – and they wouldn’t even have to be the same sex! But over and above that, when Government data so clearly shows that the majority of people now support the need for photo ID in order to vote, why is the Prime Minister proposing to scrap it? Exactly who is intended to benefit from this?

If you look at the statistics, the only people who seem to object to this requirement are from ethnic minority groups, and they do so on the grounds that many of them don’t possess photographic identification, while any such requirement discriminates against women wearing traditional dress, such as the Niqab. Why then, in this age of increasing threat to national security, is our Prime Minister so keen to remove the entirely reasonable need for voter ID, that is supported by the majority? We know that Labour has traditionally depended on the Muslim and ethnic minority vote to win seats, and that this has been severely eroded in recent years, following the Hamas attack on Israel. But is Andy Burnham really so desperate to claw back the Muslim vote, that he’ll sacrifice the interests of the nation as a whole?

And why is he so keen to lower the voting age to 16? There hasn’t been any huge outcry demanding this, and science shows that the adolescent brain doesn’t become fully mature until around 32 years of age. It also shows that the front and back parts of the brain develop at different rates, and that the front, or reasoning, part is the last to mature. Meaning that adolescent actions are governed by the back part of the brain, which controls emotion, and not intellect. Overall, in fact, teenagers lack good judgement and are unable to process the long-term consequences of their actions. Which is why, traditionally, they are regarded as volatile, rebellious, prone to emotion, and risk takers. Many, of course, are also highly altruistic – but they don’t always live up to their own aspirations, and for their own wellbeing – not to mention survival – they need to be set boundaries.

Teenagers are also, of course, highly suggestible, and many find themselves drawn to the lure of revolution, which perhaps makes them predisposed to vote Labour. But, at 16, they lack capacity to see the bigger picture, not just for themselves, but for society as a whole. Childhood is a time for pushing boundaries, and learning from the mistakes made. It is not a time to decide policy on which the lives and wellbeing of millions may well depend.

While policy remains governed by self-interest, the country will not prosper, and the chaos afflicting our society – that so blatantly rejects God – can only increase.

We would remind all those in government, and especially the Prime Minister, that they are elected to serve and work for the good of the people – not their own interests. And that the foundation of the Palace of Westminster, where they meet – and indeed of the whole nation – is Christian. MPs and Ministers of State hold office under God. They are called to uphold the faith and values on which our nation is built, and they have no mandate to impose ideologies or belief systems that are in conflict with the God to whom, historically, our nation has sworn allegiance. Most of all, they must not pander to the demands of interest groups that are hostile to our heritage, national identity and values.

There are difficult times ahead. For the survival and wellbeing of our nation, it is urgent that we recover memory of who and what we are – a nation genuinely dedicated to Christ – and that we stand, without fear or favour, on the values that once made us great.