Natural election

The air is buzzing with excitement. First-time voters excitedly walk to the polling station with their proud parents in tow. Families bite their nails as they tune into live updates on their TV.

Well, not exactly. In fact, it could be any other day. Many are likely not even aware that local elections will take place today in 230 of England's 317 councils.

Local elections are rarely met with much enthusiasm, yet they are very important. Local authorities are responsible for many public services, including libraries, housing, refuse collection and transport.¹

And this year's results will be particularly telling. It is British prime minister Rishi Sunak's first electoral test, with pollsters predicting that the ConservativesA traditionally right-wing or centre right political party in the UK. Members are sometimes called Tories. will lose their grip on a number of significant councils.²

Conservative party chairman Greg Hands has predicted that his party will lose 1,000 seats. A ToryA member of the Conservative party.  bloodbath could cast doubt on Sunak's leadership.

It could be an exciting chance for democracy to flex its muscles, pundits say. But turnout is expected to hit all-time lows amid widespread apathyLack of interest or enthusiasm. and the distraction of the coronationThe ceremony where a King or Queen is crowned. weekend.

This election also marks the rollout of new voter ID laws, as voters will be turned away from polling stations for the first time if they do not have a valid photo ID.

The scheme has been criticised heavily, both for its impracticality - two million people across the UK do not currently possess a usable photo ID - and for its expense. The Cabinet OfficeThe Cabinet Office is part of the centre of government, alongside No 10 Downing Street and the Treasury. Its head office is near Downing Street.  estimated that the cost of enforcing the new ID could be as high as £180m across a decade.

Low turnout has led some to argue that Britain needs to consider making voting compulsoryNot optional. . Around 15% of democracies around the world use mandatory voting, including Belgium, Argentina and Australia. 

It would certainly raise turnout, which has averaged at a measly 65% in the six general elections the UK has had so far in this millennium. But it would also mean that election results would likely be more reflective of the views of the general population.

But others worry that forcing reluctant voters to turn out would do nothing to tackle the underlying causes of political apathy, rather compelling them to tick a name on the ballot paper for the sake of it - and probably at random.

Yes: Forcing people to vote would lend more legitimacy to electoral winners and provide greater guidance about what the majority of the population actually wants. Currently, many voices are left unheard.

No: A key aspect of democracy is choice. To take away people's right to refuse to vote would be an unspeakable hypocrisy. Besides, many people do not vote because they are ill-informed - why force them to choose between candidates they know nothing about?

Or... There are better ways to deal with voters' apathy than force. Better education, incentives to vote and more political stability would all increase turnout.