Right of voting in an AGM

[Jeff Layman]

Are there general legal rights about voting in an AGM, or are they
always specific and in the control of the party having the AGM?

I, and I expect many others, have just been sent notice of the
Nationwide Building Society's AGM. The email they sent included a link
to a website where I could obtain further information and log in to
vote. The website is run by Civica Election Services. To log in, I have
to tick a box that I have read and accept the Terms and Conditions,
which are linked to at
<https://secure.cesvotes.com/V3-1-0/nbs22/en/termsandconditions>. I have
concerns about point 4 in the T&C: "I agree to the Society using
anonymised voting information and data to produce statistical analyses
for business purposes, to issue a reminder to members who have not used
their vote during the voting period and to thank members and those who
have voted after the AGM..."

Surely this part of point 4 has nothing to do with an AGM. Isn't an AGM
for specific purposes such as to elect officials, approve the accounts,
vote on resolutions, etc. As to contacting those who haven't voted, and
thank those who have, exactly how can the latter be done with anonymised
data?

If I choose to not accept the T&C, it appears that I will not be able to
log in and vote. Is this legal? In addition, it would appear that those
who vote at the AGM, or post their votes on paper, do not have to agree
to the T&C. Is this not discriminatory?

--

Jeff

[Mark Goodge]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:50:46 +0100, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Are there general legal rights about voting in an AGM, or are they
>always specific and in the control of the party having the AGM?
>
>I, and I expect many others, have just been sent notice of the
>Nationwide Building Society's AGM. The email they sent included a link
>to a website where I could obtain further information and log in to
>vote. The website is run by Civica Election Services. To log in, I have
>to tick a box that I have read and accept the Terms and Conditions,
>which are linked to at
><https://secure.cesvotes.com/V3-1-0/nbs22/en/termsandconditions>. I have
>concerns about point 4 in the T&C: "I agree to the Society using
>anonymised voting information and data to produce statistical analyses
>for business purposes, to issue a reminder to members who have not used
>their vote during the voting period and to thank members and those who
>have voted after the AGM..."
>
>Surely this part of point 4 has nothing to do with an AGM. Isn't an AGM
>for specific purposes such as to elect officials, approve the accounts,
>vote on resolutions, etc. As to contacting those who haven't voted, and
>thank those who have, exactly how can the latter be done with anonymised
>data?

They will know who has and hasn't voted, and can use that information to contact
people accordingly. The anonymised data is used for statistical purposes, which
is a separate and distinct type of use which needs a separate permission.

>If I choose to not accept the T&C, it appears that I will not be able to
>log in and vote. Is this legal? In addition, it would appear that those
>who vote at the AGM, or post their votes on paper, do not have to agree
>to the T&C. Is this not discriminatory?

Those who attend the AGM in person will have their attendance registered. Those
who vote by post will have the fact of their vote being cast recorded. That has
always been the case. But, because the online vote is conducted electronically
and any subsequent communication is conducted electronically, they need your
consent to send those communications. It's specifically the communications you
are consenting to, not recording the data. If you don't want those post-vote
communications, then the solution is not to use online voting, but instead to
request a traditional paper ballot (or go to the AGM). The data collected by the
organisation will be exactly the same in both cases, but you won't get an email
following the latter.

Mark

[David McNeish]

On Wednesday, 15 June 2022 at 13:50:56 UTC+1, Jeff Layman wrote:

> If I choose to not accept the T&C, it appears that I will not be able to
> log in and vote. Is this legal? In addition, it would appear that those
> who vote at the AGM, or post their votes on paper, do not have to agree
> to the T&C. Is this not discriminatory?

Not unlawfully discriminatory, unless you think it's infringing on a protected
characteristic? I expect the minimum they need to allow is in-person or on-
paper proxy votes, so they can apply added criteria to online votes if they
wish (or not provide them at all).

[Jeff Layman]

On 15/06/2022 14:33, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:50:46 +0100, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Are there general legal rights about voting in an AGM, or are they
>> always specific and in the control of the party having the AGM?
>>
>> I, and I expect many others, have just been sent notice of the
>> Nationwide Building Society's AGM. The email they sent included a link
>> to a website where I could obtain further information and log in to
>> vote. The website is run by Civica Election Services. To log in, I have
>> to tick a box that I have read and accept the Terms and Conditions,
>> which are linked to at
>> <https://secure.cesvotes.com/V3-1-0/nbs22/en/termsandconditions>. I have
>> concerns about point 4 in the T&C: "I agree to the Society using
>> anonymised voting information and data to produce statistical analyses
>> for business purposes, to issue a reminder to members who have not used
>> their vote during the voting period and to thank members and those who
>> have voted after the AGM..."
>>
>> Surely this part of point 4 has nothing to do with an AGM. Isn't an AGM
>> for specific purposes such as to elect officials, approve the accounts,
>> vote on resolutions, etc. As to contacting those who haven't voted, and
>> thank those who have, exactly how can the latter be done with anonymised
>> data?
>
> They will know who has and hasn't voted, and can use that information to contact
> people accordingly. The anonymised data is used for statistical purposes, which
> is a separate and distinct type of use which needs a separate permission.

There is no separate permission possible, as there is only one check
box. It is also not part of the AGM, but for "business purposes".

>> If I choose to not accept the T&C, it appears that I will not be able to
>> log in and vote. Is this legal? In addition, it would appear that those
>> who vote at the AGM, or post their votes on paper, do not have to agree
>> to the T&C. Is this not discriminatory?
>
> Those who attend the AGM in person will have their attendance registered. Those
> who vote by post will have the fact of their vote being cast recorded. That has
> always been the case. But, because the online vote is conducted electronically
> and any subsequent communication is conducted electronically, they need your
> consent to send those communications. It's specifically the communications you
> are consenting to, not recording the data. If you don't want those post-vote
> communications, then the solution is not to use online voting, but instead to
> request a traditional paper ballot (or go to the AGM). The data collected by the
> organisation will be exactly the same in both cases, but you won't get an email
> following the latter.

I don't think that is the case. I consented (or at least agreed) to
having information relating to the AGM being emailed to me rather than
having paper either last year or the previous one. And, as I pointed
out, anonymised information is of no use for a specific purpose of
contact, as there is - or should be - no connection between the data
and the provider of that data. The data is for business purposes, not
the AGM, and if I submitted paper there would, I assume, be no check box
to tick. If there was, and I didn't tick it, having otherwise completed
the voting requirements, could the Nationwide legally refuse to take my
vote(s) into account?

It's perhaps of relevance that at the bottom of every Nationwide webpage
it states "Nationwide is not responsible for the content of external
websites". The voting information and the Terms and Conditions are part
of the CES website, so, by definition, Nationwide appears to be not
responsible for them.

--

Jeff

[notya...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, 15 June 2022 at 13:50:56 UTC+1, Jeff Layman wrote:

In UK elections registered political parties can obtained the marked register of those who voted (but not how obviously).

The results of UK elections are anonymised and available for statistical analysis.

Similarly postal voters have to register to do so, and sign and put their birth date on the form that accompanies their vote. Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have to produce photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more] and your passport has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to exclude Derby and Joan.

[Andy Burns]

Mark Clayton wrote:

> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have to produce
> photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more] and your passport
> has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to exclude Derby and Joan.

I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a free-issue voting card?

[Andy Burns]

The online text of the Representation of the People Act 1983 hasn't yet been
updated, but here's the list of acceptable voter ID

<https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2022/37/schedule/1/enacted#p00286>

[David McNeish]

Yes, but it's still inserting barriers, which are bound to deter/prevent far more
people from voting than ever had their vote stolen by impersonation.

[JNugent]

On 18/06/2022 05:38 pm, Andy Burns wrote:

> Mark Clayton wrote:
>
>> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have to
>> produce photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more]
>> and your passport has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to

>> exclude Derby [sic*] and Joan.

>
> I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a free-issue voting
> card?

This is an age-old question, though...

Does a passport which expired last week (or even last year) somehow fail
to still be a reasonable ID document (even if you couldn't get into the
USA on it)?


* It's usually rendered as "Darby and Joan".

[JNugent]

> people from voting than ever had their vote stolen by impersonation...

...or who had their vote cast "on their behalf" when they didn't event
want to vote.

It's hopefully going to deter (some sorts of) criminals.

Of course, it's only a work in progress. It could never be anything
else. Other measures will be necessary in order to deter and prevent
other sorts of electoral crimes.

In the meantime, let us reflect on the fact that there are people who
agree and insist that ID must be shown in order to (for instance) claim
Retirement Pension or to be issued with a bus pass, but not to vote.

Spot the logical inconsistency.

[Max Demian]

I suppose the idea is that people would be more careless with an expired
document than a current one. One with a photo could have another photo
substituted.

--
Max Demian

[David McNeish]

Yes, I expect the logic is that somebody would be more likely to meddle with an
expired passport (in a way which might get past a harassed bank clerk or
polling teller who isn't looking at them constantly, but not an immigration desk).

[Andy Burns]

JNugent wrote:

> This is an age-old question, though...
>
> Does a passport which expired last week (or even last year) somehow fail to
> still be a reasonable ID document (even if you couldn't get into the USA on it)?

People started getting 'sniffy' about mine in 2020 (it expired in 2016).

[JNugent]

Wouldn't that be easier with a bus pass or library card?

I was once boarded a Berolina bus in West Berlin's KuDamm. We were
heading for Checkpoint Charlie and East Berlin for a tour. This was
before Schengen. A couple of Dutch guys on adjacent seats handed their
passports to the East German border guard who had come aboard to take
possession of all our passports.

A few minutes later, the guards returned and re-distributed our
passports. The Dutch holder of one of the passports had to pay a penalty
of something like 50Dm because his passport had expired. He had
travelled into the Federal Republic on the same passport without
problems. It was only on crossing into the GDR that he encountered a
problem. And even then, it wasn't a real problem. The DGR let him in
just the same (they wanted the Dms he would spend whilst in E Berlin).

As the Dutch passengers told the rest of us (including a good few
Americans), in Europe, a slightly expired passport was accepted as ID.
It didn't stop doing its job as an identity document. The holder was
still the same person.

[JNugent]

That's what I meant.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh6ecm...@mid.individual.net>, at 17:55:49 on Sat, 18
Jun 2022, Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> remarked:

And it's been speculated that the 'Electoral Identity Card' would be
issued using the processes as for bus passes.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh9tob...@mid.individual.net>, at 01:36:27 on Mon, 20
Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 19/06/2022 05:48 pm, Max Demian wrote:
>
>> On 19/06/2022 15:01, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 18/06/2022 05:38 pm, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>> Mark Clayton wrote:
>>
>>>>> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have
>>>>>to produce photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more]
>>>>> and your passport has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to
>>>>> exclude Derby [sic*] and Joan.
>>
>>>> I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a free-issue
>>>>voting card?
>>
>>> This is an age-old question, though...
>>> Does a passport which expired last week (or even last year) somehow
>>>fail to still be a reasonable ID document (even if you couldn't get
>>>into the USA on it)?
>> I suppose the idea is that people would be more careless with an
>>expired document than a current one. One with a photo could have
>>another photo substituted.
>
>Wouldn't that be easier with a bus pass or library card?

My bus pass has the photo printed "within" it, just like a plastic card
photo driving licence. It doesn't appear to me to be something I could
tinker with.

But it's my problem - it's that of the person drawing up the list of
acceptable ID for whatever the circumstances are that require
verification. And that will depend whether you are showing it to a
librarian or an immigration official.

>I was once boarded a Berolina bus in West Berlin's KuDamm. We were
>heading for Checkpoint Charlie and East Berlin for a tour.

So this was long ago, and literally that part of the past *was* a
different country.

>This was before Schengen. A couple of Dutch guys on adjacent seats
>handed their passports to the East German border guard who had come
>aboard to take possession of all our passports.
>
>A few minutes later, the guards returned and re-distributed our
>passports. The Dutch holder of one of the passports had to pay a
>penalty of something like 50Dm because his passport had expired. He had
>travelled into the Federal Republic on the same passport without
>problems. It was only on crossing into the GDR that he encountered a
>problem. And even then, it wasn't a real problem. The DGR let him in
>just the same (they wanted the Dms he would spend whilst in E Berlin).
>
>As the Dutch passengers told the rest of us (including a good few
>Americans), in Europe, a slightly expired passport was accepted as ID.
>It didn't stop doing its job as an identity document. The holder was
>still the same person.

--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh8ohr...@mid.individual.net>, at 15:01:31 on Sun, 19

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

And the age old answer is: it's a matter which is taken into account
when drawing up the risk analysis for the specific circumstances which
require an ID check. And different circumstances have different risk
assessments.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <476dnX67mfD3zjL_...@brightview.co.uk>, at
17:48:41 on Sun, 19 Jun 2022, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>
remarked:

All part of the risk assessment I mentioned a few moments ago. It's
almost invariably the case that newer passports are less able to be
doctored than older ones, so it is one of the things to take into
account.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh9tpn...@mid.individual.net>, at 01:37:12 on Mon, 20

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

And different "people" will get to that stage of sniffiness at different
times. There is no one-size-fits all for this.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <+MAqVigi...@perry.uk>, at 06:21:38 on Mon, 20 Jun 2022,
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> remarked:

>In message <jh9tob...@mid.individual.net>, at 01:36:27 on Mon, 20
>Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>On 19/06/2022 05:48 pm, Max Demian wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/06/2022 15:01, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 18/06/2022 05:38 pm, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>> Mark Clayton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have
>>>>>>to produce photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more]
>>>>>> and your passport has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to
>>>>>> exclude Derby [sic*] and Joan.
>>>
>>>>> I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a free-issue
>>>>>voting card?
>>>
>>>> This is an age-old question, though...
>>>> Does a passport which expired last week (or even last year) somehow
>>>>fail to still be a reasonable ID document (even if you couldn't get
>>>>into the USA on it)?
>>> I suppose the idea is that people would be more careless with an
>>>expired document than a current one. One with a photo could have
>>>another photo substituted.
>>
>>Wouldn't that be easier with a bus pass or library card?
>
>My bus pass has the photo printed "within" it, just like a plastic card
>photo driving licence. It doesn't appear to me to be something I could
>tinker with.
>
>But it's

not

[Max Demian]

I think this varies considerable between councils. South Bucks posted
mine out without any proof of identity or age (a few years ago). Slough
required me to attend in person with my driving licence. I don't know
how they do it for non-drivers, or how they do it now that they don't
have any public offices.

--
Max Demian

[Roland Perry]

In message <VrSdnQPS2a5L-C3_...@brightview.co.uk>, at
13:19:35 on Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>
remarked:

>On 20/06/2022 06:11, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <jh6ecm...@mid.individual.net>, at 17:55:49 on Sat, 18
>>Jun 2022, Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>>> Mark Clayton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have
>>>>>to produce
>>>>> photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more] and
>>>>>your passport
>>>>> has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to exclude Derby
>>>>>and Joan.
>>>>  I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a free-issue
>>>>voting card?
>>>
>>> The online text of the Representation of the People Act 1983 hasn't
>>>yet been updated, but here's the list of acceptable voter ID
>>>
>>> <https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2022/37/schedule/1/enacted#p00286>
>> And it's been speculated that the 'Electoral Identity Card' would be
>>issued using the processes as for bus passes.
>
>I think this varies considerable between councils. South Bucks posted
>mine out without any proof of identity or age (a few years ago). Slough
>required me to attend in person with my driving licence.

The past is a different country...

>I don't know how they do it for non-drivers, or how they do it now that
>they don't have any public offices.

Why do you suppose bus passes are only issued to drivers, and most
Councils still have offices.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 20/06/2022 06:09 pm, Roland Perry wrote:

> Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com> remarked:

?????

Bus passes only issued to drivers?

That's going to be news to a nonogenarian friend of ours, a lady who has
never in her life held a driving licence.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jhce63...@mid.individual.net>, at 00:29:07 on Tue, 21

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 20/06/2022 06:09 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>>> Mark Clayton wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Those who turn up at a polling station do not, but may soon have
>>>>>>>to  produce
>>>>>>> photo ID - difficult if you are old, don't drive [any more] and
>>>>>>>your  passport
>>>>>>> has expired - smacks of Jim Crow laws, but more to exclude Derby
>>>>>>>and  Joan.
>>>>>>  I though the proposals were to include bus passes or a
>>>>>>free-issue voting card?
>>
>>>>> The online text of the Representation of the People Act 1983
>>>>>hasn't yet been updated, but here's the list of acceptable voter ID
>>>>>
>>>>><https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2022/37/schedule/1/enacted#p00>>>>>286>
>>
>>>>  And it's been speculated that the 'Electoral Identity Card' would
>>>>be issued using the processes as for bus passes.
>>
>>> I think this varies considerable between councils. South Bucks
>>>posted mine out without any proof of identity or age (a few years
>>>ago). Slough required me to attend in person with my driving licence.
>> The past is a different country...
>>
>>> I don't know how they do it for non-drivers, or how they do it now

********************************************

>>>that they don't have any public offices.
>> Why do you suppose bus passes are only issued to drivers, and most
>>Councils still have offices.
>
>?????
>
>Bus passes only issued to drivers?

See above.
--
Roland Perry

[Max Demian]

I didn't say they only issued them to drivers, just wondered how they
did it if you don't have a licence. Or passport. And Slough closed their
High Street office a couple of years ago. They want people to do
everything online or over the phone. I don't know how they verify your
identity for your first bus pass.

--
Max Demian

[Roland Perry]

In message <IZOdnfx6Y6YZPiz_...@brightview.co.uk>, at
11:55:01 on Tue, 21 Jun 2022, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>

remarked:
>On 20/06/2022 18:09, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <VrSdnQPS2a5L-C3_...@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>13:19:35 on Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>
>>remarked:
>>> On 20/06/2022 06:11, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>>>>  And it's been speculated that the 'Electoral Identity Card' would
>>>>be issued using the processes as for bus passes.
>>>
>>> I think this varies considerable between councils. South Bucks
>>>posted mine out without any proof of identity or age (a few years
>>>ago). Slough required me to attend in person with my driving licence.
>> The past is a different country...
>>
>>> I don't know how they do it for non-drivers, or how they do it now
>>>that they don't have any public offices.

>> Why do you suppose bus passes are only issued to drivers, and most
>>Councils still have offices.
>
>I didn't say they only issued them to drivers, just wondered how they
>did it if you don't have a licence. Or passport. And Slough closed
>their High Street office a couple of years ago. They want people to do
>everything online or over the phone. I don't know how they verify your
>identity for your first bus pass.

A quick look at their website will doubtless acquaint you with the
procedure involved.
--
Roland Perry

[Max Demian]

A "quick look at their website" takes you to the online application
form. It's very long winded, with many pages, and no indication of the
requirements (such as photo). It begins with a warning that if you tarry
too long on a page you lose all the information already entered. (I
think it's 15 minutes or 24 minutes if you "register" with them.)

There is a phone number, and a warning of a possible long wait.

Fortunately I already have mine, and they send renewals automatically.

Welcome to Digital Britain.

--
Max Demian

[Roland Perry]

In message <yImdnQQ5QPyi3Sn_...@brightview.co.uk>, at
11:28:14 on Thu, 23 Jun 2022, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>

That surprises me a lot, every one I've seen is quite explicit about
what proof of entitlement they require.

West Berkshire for example says:

National Bus Pass Application for People of Eligible Age 2020-2021

Proof of Residence:

Council Tax
Bank Statement
Utility Bill
Driving Licence (Photocard only)

Proof of Age:

Passport
Birth Certificate (if name unchanged)
Pension Entitlement Letter
Driving Licence (Photocard only)
NHS Medical Card
--
Roland Perry