The Representation of the People Bill moves democracy forward – but more progress is needed

One of the headline measures in the Bill is the extension of the franchise for Westminster and English local elections to include 16 and 17-year-olds.

This change resolves an inconsistency that has existed since 2014. Young people aged 16 and 17 in Scotland and Wales have been able to vote in elections for some time, while those in England have been excluded. The Bill finally brings England into line with the rest of the UK.

The policy enjoys broad support from Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green MPs. During the debate, Scottish MPs such as Kirsteen Sullivan noted that the contribution of young people to the democratic process since Holyrood brought in the measure. Emily Thornberry also emphasised that expanding the franchise should go hand in hand with strong and consistent political education, ensuring young voters are equipped with the knowledge they need to participate fully in democracy.

Lowering the voting age recognises that young people already engage with politics and deserve a voice in the decisions that shape their future.

Another important proposal is the introduction of Automatic Voter Registration (AVR). In simple terms, AVR would see the government automatically add eligible voters to the electoral register using existing public data.

This is a practical reform that would remove unnecessary barriers to participation. It would mean fewer people having to remember to register when they move house and would help ensure that electoral registers more accurately reflect the populations of each constituency.

Accurate registers benefit both voters and MPs. Constituencies would better reflect the communities they represent, and citizens would find it easier to exercise their right to vote.

The concept is not entirely new. Elements of automatic registration have already been trialled in parts of Wales for Senedd elections.

During the debate, Gavin Williamson argued that the policy should be rolled out uniformly rather than gradually. A phased implementation risks creating uneven electoral registers if some parts of the country adopt the system before others. Ultimately, every constituency deserves accurate registers, and every voter should have an equal opportunity to participate.

Money plays a significant role in politics. While campaigning requires funding, our democracy should never be shaped primarily by those with the deepest pockets.

Several MPs raised concerns during the debate that the Bill does not go far enough in strengthening political finance rules. Although it introduces stronger “know your donor” checks, it still does not include a cap on political donations.

Questions were also raised about the continued risk of foreign influence in British politics. Unincorporated associations, for example, still have relatively high reporting thresholds of just over £11,000.

Liam Conlon highlighted concerns about foreign money entering the system and pointed to the case of Nathan Gill in the European Parliament as an example of the risks posed by foreign interference.

There were also concerns about cryptocurrency donations. Several MPs argued that until regulators are confident they can properly track and monitor these payments, such donations should be banned — a position that aligns with the advice of the Electoral Commission.

The Bill also expands the range of documents that can be used as voter ID. In a long-running campaign priority for the Electoral Reform Society, more forms of identification could now be accepted at polling stations.

One potential change would allow bank cards to be used as voter ID at the next general election. This would reduce the number of people turned away at polling stations simply because they do not possess one of the currently accepted forms of identification.

Our research has consistently shown that voter ID is a solution in search of a problem and that it disproportionately affects certain groups of voters. At the 2024 general election, four percent of people who initially went to vote ultimately chose not to because of voter ID requirements. Expanding accepted forms of ID would therefore help mitigate some of the barriers created by the policy.