Veteran card is now accepted as photo ID at polling stations
People with an armed forces veteran card can use it as photo ID for the first time in Thursday's elections in England, following a change in the law.
There are only certain kinds of photo identification that will be accepted at polling stations and voters without the correct ID will be turned away.
A passport, driving licence photocard or blue badge are all valid, as is an older person's bus pass.
The veteran card is now also accepted, after the rules on photo ID were updated in October 2024.
The card is a formal recognition of military service and can be used by veterans to get easier access to support from the NHS, charities and local authorities.
Niki Nixon, director of communications at the Electoral Commission, told the PA news agency: 'This year, for the first time, the list of acceptable voter ID will include the armed forces veteran card.
'This means you can show your veteran card at polling stations in order to vote.
'Everyone voting at a polling station on Thursday will need to show photo ID before they can be given their ballot paper, so we're encouraging all voters to check they have a form of ID they can use.
'The full list of acceptable ID can be found on the Electoral Commission website.
'If you've lost your ID, you can appoint an emergency proxy to vote on your behalf.
'You will need to contact your council to arrange this before 5pm on election day, and the person you appoint will need their own accepted form of photo ID.'
Photo ID rules were brought in as part of the Elections Act 2022 and were first enforced in England in 2023 and across Britain at the 2024 general election.
Voters in Northern Ireland have been required to show ID at elections since 2003.
A report by the Electoral Commission estimated that 0.08% of people who tried to vote at a polling station at the 2024 general election were not issued with a ballot paper because they did not have an accepted form of ID – the equivalent of one in 1,200 voters, or around 16,000 people across Britain.
Some 23 local authorities in England are holding elections on Thursday, with a total of 1,641 council seats up for grabs.
Elections are also taking place for four regional mayors and two local mayors, while voters in the constituency of Runcorn & Helsby will choose a new MP.
Polling stations are open from 7am to 10pm.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Defence at 5pc or learn to speak Russian? Spasibo, Mr Rutte
The secretary general of Nato, Mark Rutte, has come to London as the head of the most powerful military alliance on the planet to remind us Brits that unless we re-invest in our military capabilities we had better start learning Russian. Had we not achieved a similar feat after the 'awakening' of 1940, we would now be talking German. The development of Hitler's Nazi Germany in the 1930s is so frighteningly similar to Putin's actions in the 2010s and 2020s as to make you think the same playbook is being followed. Appearing to almost directly address Ms Reeves – ahead of her spending review on Wednesday – Rutte said: 'If you do not go to the 5 per cent, including the 3.5 per cent for defence spending, you could still have the NHS … the pension system, but you better learn to speak Russian. That's the consequence.' Rutte means 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence – as opposed to Keir Starmer's only concrete target of 2.5 per cent – plus another 1.5 per cent on security and infrastructure. In some respects Rutte is wrong. There will be no welfare state and no NHS if Putin takes over. Just look at the fate of ordinary people in Russia who can barely afford to eat, and both inflation and interest rates north of 20 per cent and rising. That shows what life might be like under a modern Warsaw Pact. Mr Rutte realises that we cannot appease tyrants like Putin and the only way to scare them off is to show strength. 'We are deadly serious that if anyone tries to attack us, the consequences of that attack would be devastating – be it Russia or anyone else,' he said. We must not repeat the mistakes of our forebears in the 1930s, who failed to rearm to the level of deterrence. If we had realised that only total domination of Europe would satisfy Hitler, we would have confronted pressing demands at home for more welfare spending and avoided war – not by letting the aggressor have his way, as was famously attempted by Neville Chamberlain, but by being strong enough that Hitler would have avoided a confrontation. As history recalls, when Chamberlain returned from Munich saying he had chosen 'peace in our time', Winston Churchill rebuked him: 'You were given a choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war.' If we look realistically at what Putin has been telling us for the last 20 years we will understand that only the re-establishment of the old Soviet Union will satisfy him. The fact that none of those countries want to be part of Putin's Russia, means only one thing, as we are sworn to defend them under Nato Article 5: war. If we abandon them, we will be dishonoured – and we will be next, facing an enlarged empire with even greater resources. The Germans, realising belatedly the threat of another tyrant who wants to subjugate them, have issued a stark warning this week. Herr Bruno Kahl, head of the Federal Intelligence Service, said his agency had clear intelligence indications that Russian officials believed the collective defence obligations enshrined in the Nato treaty no longer had practical force. 'We are quite certain, and we have intelligence showing it, that Ukraine is only a step on the journey westward,' says Kahl. Secretary General Rutte is spot on. This message from a former European liberal politician may get many backs up here, but we cannot ignore it. History tells us he's right. Sadly we do not appear to have a Churchill among our modern day politicians to lead us through the coming confrontation with Putin. I know from comments added to my previous pieces on this subject in this paper that there appear to be some who want us to capitulate and give up without a fight. Most of them are clearly Russian bots, part of the massive Russian propaganda machine who would want us to do exactly that. But if people think life in Britain is bad now, look east and see the misery most Russians live under. Let us heed Rutte's warning, and in the immortal words of Donald Trump 'build baby build' military capability. Quite frankly if we fail to defend ourselves now, everything else vexing people at the moment will become horrifically irrelevant. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Government accused of prioritising pensioners over children
A gulf between government spending on pensioners and children has widened by 170pc in the past two decades, new research suggests. Last year, public spending per pensioner was £12,600 higher than it was per child, according to a report by think tank the Intergenerational Foundation. It reveals spending on pensioners has increased by more than half in the past two decades, while the amount of taxpayer cash devoted to children has lagged. Between 2004 and 2024, spending on retirees went up by 55pc in real terms, while children saw an increase of just 20pc during the same period, the report said. Analysis showed taxpayers spent £31,000 per pensioner last year compared with £18,000 per child, while working-age adults cost £14,000. It comes after Rachel Reeves reversed her decision to strip most pensioners of the £200 winter fuel payment following a months-long public outcry. Liz Emerson, chief executive of the International Foundation, said government policy is overly favourable to pensioners because they are a key voting constituency. She said: 'Welcome, though rapid, ageing has expanded the welfare state for the old while support has been largely withdrawn from the young. Add the power of the grey vote, and it is all too tempting for governments to respond to older generations' wants, irrespective of their actual need.' She added this increasingly contrasted with societal difficulties faced by younger people. 'Younger generations face a polycrisis of low government investment, high housing costs, low welfare support, and high taxation. 'The fact that birth rates are falling may well indicate that younger generations do not believe they can provide the economic stability needed to bring up a family.' The research divided government spending on public services like the NHS, state pension, education and social care by the number of children, working-age adults and pensioners in the country. Britain's birthrate recently fell to a record low. The official fertility rate for England and Wales is 1.44 births per woman, significantly less than the 2.1 required to maintain population size. Figures published at the end of last year showed that the number of children born to British mothers had fallen by a quarter in 15 years. It suggests many more women are putting off having children, amid rising cost of living. The increase in state spending on pensioners has been partly driven by the pensions triple lock, which links state pension payments to inflation, wage growth or 2.5pc depending on whatever is highest. Between 2011 and 2025, the state pension for those who reached retirement age before 2016 rose from £102.15 to £169.50 per week, a 66pc increase. Those who hit retirement age after 2016 saw weekly payments go up from £155.65 to £221.20. The report concluded that the triple lock was not 'intergenerationally fair' amid a growing ageing population, referencing Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) projections that government spending on the state pension will increase from around 4.9pc of GDP last year to 7.9pc by 2074. It added that pension poverty had declined significantly in recent decades, from 28pc in 1995 to 16pc in 2023. Meanwhile, child poverty has remained consistently high with only a marginal decrease from 32pc to 30pc during the same period. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Four ways the spending review could impact you
Rachel Reeves has said her spending review tomorrow will be about 'making working people better off', admitting that not enough Britons are feeling their lives improving under the Labour government. Sharing out some £113 billion freed up by looser borrowing rules, the chancellor is expected to announce funding increases for the NHS, schools and defence along with several infrastructure projects. However, other areas could face cuts as the Treasury tries to fulfil its self-imposed fiscal rule to match day-to-day spending with revenues. Some have suggested that the government will be unable to achieve this balance without imposing higher taxes, with tomorrow's spending review likely to set the tone for this year's autumn budget. Here, Yahoo News takes a look at what the spending review entails, and how it is likely to affect your lives. A spending review is the process the government uses to set all departments' budgets for future years, according to the website, including for public services. The current 2025 spending review takes place in two phases – the first of which concluded at the 2024 autumn budget when spending plans for 2024/25 and 2025/26 were confirmed. Phase two, will prioritise delivering the government's missions, and has seen departments holding negotiations with the Treasury over their spending plans for the coming years. Reeve's announcement tomorrow will set planned day-to-day spending totals for all government departments from 2026/27 to 2028/29, and investment spending plans for a further year (from 2026/27 to 2029/30). The government has said that its review will be 'zero-based', meaning it will set budgets from zero and assess all spending for value for money, rather than adjusting up or down from existing budgets, according to Parliamentary documents. Here are some ways this process could affect the lives of ordinary Britons. The NHS is expected to receive an additional £30bn in funding in tomorrow's spending review – most likely at the expense of other public services. A 2.8% increase to the Department of Health and Social Care's day-to-day budget is reportedly to be set over the three year spending review period, which according to The Times, amounts to a £17bn real-terms increase, although capital spending is only expected to rise in line with inflation. What does this mean for patients? Well, it could help the government achieve its target of 92% of patients in England waiting for planned treatment being seen within 18 weeks of referral by the next election, rather than the current 60%. The spending review will likely benefit the government's 10-year plan to modernise the NHS, including with more community-based care, better preventative treatment and digital technologies, with details on a revamp and additional funding of the NHS app expected to be announced in tomorrow's review. This, in theory at least, means you could have more freedom and flexibility in accessing scan and test results, booking appointments, and receiving information on treatments and trials, as well as the ability to choose which hospital to go to. Ahead of her review, Reeves announced that £15.6bn will go towards improving public transport projects in the North and Midlands – hopefully improving travel times and available routes. The spending settlement includes £2.5bn for Greater Manchester for projects including new tram stops in Bury, Manchester and Oldham and £2.4bn for an extension of the metro from Birmingham city centre to the new sports quarter. It also includes £2.1bn to start building West Yorkshire Mass Transit by 2028, £2bn for the East Midlands to design a new mass transit system between Derby and Nottingham and £1.8bn for a metro extension linking Newcastle and Sunderland via Washington. An additional £1.6bn is being given to Liverpool City Region for new bus routes, including to the airport and football stadiums, while £1.5bn will go to South Yorkshire, including £530m to renew the region's trams. The deal also includes £1bn for Tees Valley, including £60m for the Platform 3 extension at Middlesbrough station and £800m for the West of England, including £200m for mass transit links between Bristol, Bath, South Gloucestershire and north Somerset. The spending review looks to provide a big boost to public transport outside the capital, but Londoners will not fare as well, with Mayor Sadiq Khan decrying a lack of cash being allocated to London. Campaigners feared that the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero's Warm Homes Plan was in line for cuts, although a government source has told The Guardian that Reeves has decided against this. If this does prove true, then up to 300,000 households will likely have the same level of support in saving money on their bills and making their homes more energy efficient. The plan includes a boiler upgrade scheme supporting households switching to a heat pumps, while lower-income households and renters are entitled to energy efficiency upgrades such as insulation and low-carbon heating. Access to affordable housing may still prove challenging after tomorrow's review, however, with Inside Housing writing that the government's target of delivering 1.5 million new homes by the end of this Parliament is regarded by most as "unfulfillable". Council services such as tenant support and homelessness services could also take a hit, with councils currently making an unprecedented £1.2bn of savings and cuts to balance their books, with the County Councils Network warning tomorrow's review will be a "make or break" moment. It is rumoured that the government is considering introducing taxes on rental income for landlords in its Autumn budget to pay for the Department of Housing's spending. Schools are expected to receive an unexpected extra £4.5bn a year in the upcoming spending review in a move that will be welcomed by teachers and parents alike. This means day-to-day funding for schools will increase by more than £4.5bn a year by 2028-9 compared to this year, The Observer reports. This will help cover the expansion of free school meals for families who receive Universal Credit, and partly fund a pay rise for teachers agreed upon last month. However, school finances are still likely to feel squeezed, as the government puts £615m towards pay rises, with schools having to find £400m from their own budgets. More money is also expected for reforms to Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision, which will help more pupils stay in mainstream schools. Additional money is also set to be made available from the Treasury's £113bn capital investment fund to repair leaking roofs and crumbling classrooms. What is the spending review? Everything Rachel Reeves could announce to fix UK economy (The Independent) London bracing for cuts in Chancellor's Spending Review (The London Standard) Voices: Wes Streeting has won the spending review – but will he blow his winnings? (The Independent)
