I’m instinctively against the idea on non-specific libertarian grounds. The inclusion of a proposal for ID cards in the manifesto was the reason I didn’t vote for Labour in the 2010 General Election (if might not have swayed me if it wasn’t, at least then, a seat with a blue rosette nailed to it). Smartphones and the huge amount of data which I glibly give away these days mean that I can hardly complain about access to my information now.
I suppose my concern is mission creep. I’m sure we’ve all noticed how young adults are routinely challenged for ID when buying alcohol, and hence have been made to get used to the idea, but the only times I ever have to prove my identity is when using an airport or, more recently, to vote in person. What other reasons might I have to carry ID for which I currently don’t? Or is that paranoia?
It is being sold as a measure against illegal immigration and hence, I assume, a way of striking back against the Farage. I can’t see it doing that though. The whole point of the shadow economy is that it operates in an unregulated way and will finds ways to carry on doing so. Still, it has created common ground of condemnation between the Faragisti and Corbynites, which is an achievement in itself. I suppose the twee ‘Brit cards’ name is designed to appeal to the lamppost crowd too.
The UK’s record of delivering enormous IT projects is hardly glorious, and I can see this being a hugely expensive waste of time which never gets beyond a glitchy trial phase. The cost aside I’d be happy for that to happen, because ultimately I can’t see any advantage in it for me, on a personal or broader level.
I can’t see why it is being proposed unless it’s meant to be a huge vote winner for a struggling government, but is it really a priority that the electorate are really calling out for? I’m coming from a sceptical point of view, if not the ideologically entrenched one I would have had 15 years ago, so can anyone persuade me why I should be more comfortable with the idea than I am?
Can’t persuade you, a I share your cynicism as a “Vote Winner” scheme.
Generally though, me no problem with the concept – especially if it links up with Passport, Driving Licence, other specific ID items etc. Possibly even Railcards.
But … you’re absolutely right to call out the record of Government IT Delivery.
Cost a fortune, and only be partially delivered and (I fear) watered-down to “you only need this Mandatory Digital ID if …”
We have them here in Italy (and before the digital cards we used to have paper ones). You have to show your ID in public offices in order to get anything done and to policeman if they stop you for some reason (or, indeed, for no reason at all). I’ve never had any cause to think of them as a bad thing and occasionally they come in handy.
Having said that, Italy is generally a lot more authoritarian than the UK (my Italian friends literally don’t believe me when I explain that there’s no legal obligation in the UK to register your address with anyone).
The same in The Netherlands. I wouldn’t call this country authoritarian but you need a passport or ID card and an official adress registration. This is not a point of discussion in any part of society except for the most radical outbacks both on the left and the right. Same situation for registration to vote.
My problem is farridge is against it and I always take the opposite view to him if only for my sanity.
But I see it’s to be called a Brit Card then it’s a no.
BritCard – if that’s what it will be called, I change my mind.
Don’t want one now
This paper makes the case for the introduction of BritCard: a mandatory national digital identity that would be issued free of charge to all those with the right to live or work in the UK, whether they are British-born nationals or legal migrants. The BritCard would be a verifiable digital credential downloaded onto a user’s smartphone, which could be instantly checked by employers or landlords using a free verifier app.
https://www.labourtogether.uk/all-reports/britcard
Still got no issue with the principle, just the jingoistic (Reform Friendly?) name.
Why not just call it “National ID Card” and “Digital ID” – that’s what it is after all
(unless BRIT is some form of acronym: BRitish Identification Thingy)
Thanks for that. I read the whole thing (awful prose but mercifully short) with a raised eyebrow, but was particularly drawn to this description of the BritCard (ffs) ‘ something that would become a familiar feature of daily life for everyone in the country. ’ Excuse me? If it’s only for significant events such as buying property and new jobs why would anyone be familiar with it on a daily basis? Unless that’s just the result of a document being written by someone tin-eared enough to think that BritCard has a ring to it.
So it won’t be a ‘card’ but some digital thingy that goes to your smartphone.
Like the health card I’m sure it’ll be covered with the Union flag.
Will it be upside down?
The only aspect of this I was looking forward to was the return of officious men in intimidating leather coats moving from carriage to carriage on trains and snarling
“Papers! Papers!”
“Britcards! Britcards!” doesn’t quite have the same level of menace
What happens if you don’t have a smart phone?
That’s one of the things they are discussing during the consultation
Should’ve thought about calling it the Citizen Card or summat.
I vaguely remember that the Blair era attempt was to be called an ‘entitlement card’.
Having carried an ID card for more than 20 years, don’t have a problem with being forced to have one.
Given the balls ups recent govts have routinely made of major projects – many of them involving IT – I do have a problem with the imbeciles who will oversee this particular initiative
Apols, should have read ‘for more than 20 years when I lived in Hong Kong”
No problem with it.
They are saying it is linked to employment but we already have a National Insurance number for that so just enforce that more.
Well, quite. If it’s to crack down on people working when they shouldn’t be don’t NI numbers cover that already?
The uniqueness of the NI number itself does not make it a sound basis for the identification of individuals. To tighten this up, employers are supposed to demand other corroborating documentation such as utility bills showing names and addresses, that sort of thing. If you’ve lost sight of or forgotten your NI number and go online to try to discover your own NI, you will also have to supply this sort of supporting evidence. So the burden of closing the gap between numerical uniqueness and certifiable individual identity lies with the employer or the provider of whatever service demands an NI number. And you probably won’t need to have an NI if you’re part of the informal cash economy anyway. Cash in ‘and, innit? Which opens up another whole avenue of complication and evasion.
No problem with it. I have nothing to hide. I carry a driver’s licence and Ontario health card with me at all times so they serve as defacto ID cards.
I think it’s called freedom don’t give it away lightly.
Depends what you define as freedom.
If you work and pay tax and are registered to vote you are in the ‘system’.
I guess if you do neither of those things you could be defined as free.
@UncleWheaty I’m in the ‘system’. I have paid my taxes and National insurance throughout my working life. I’m not that happy about having to carry a proof of ID with me at all times. Yes airports/hospitals etc you should show up with ID when necessary.
It should remain as it is now feel free to carry ID but it is not compulsary.
I never suggested it should be with you at all time.
Sorry @UncleWheaty.
I was answering you but then thinking of the wider issues ‘down the road’.
It’s not called the Britcard and it’s not a card.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15136343/Scottish-Northern-Irish-Brit-Card-Keir-Starmer-digital-ID-plan.html
I work with a lot of immigrants and am related to some others. I think they will be happy to have something easy to use when renting or buying homes, applying for jobs and so on which shows their status. It seems to be assorted flag wavers who have never been challenged about this who are annoyed – Swinney, Farage and so on. Can you not see they are British, because, you know.
The Northern Irish example is another reason why BritCard, as it is called in the Labour Together paper linked by Hubes above, is another example of shocking comms from the Starmer team.
But it’s not called that. That may have been a draft idea, but is not its name. Shocking comms, no, shoddy journalism, yes.
Proven to work elsewhere without a fuss but the UK is always a special case, exceptional, better somehow. Actually, just another country as I think someone sung.
Thankyou.
I’m for them. There is an anomaly in the UK in that whilst some people don’t like immigrants coming over here and working, many seem fine with the labour market being almost designed to facilitate this. I understand one of the main reasons for the UK being a preferred destination is the ease of getting paid employment without ID and papers.
My suspicion is that Farrage is against ID cards because the last thing he wants to actually see right now is a down turn in undocumented immigrants.
Canada has a similar “free” health service like the NHS. If you don’t have your health card you have to pay. I had a medical emergency once when visiting UK, they asked me my NHS number when I was getting triaged, I said I didn’t know what it was, they said “Don’t worry, nobody does!”
@Leedsboy nail on the head. Don’t have a problem with it and don’t see what the fuss is all about.
If Farage is against it then that’s a yea from me.
Many countries in the EU have them and still suffer the same issue with illegal immigration.
It just comes across as another effort to appease voters who will never vote Labour anyway. And will cost a fortune and be badly implemented.
Whilst this is correct, it does go some way to explaining why some migrants continue on to the UK as an end destination.
Some way, but this is a good response
I like the idea of a form of ID that everyone can have. I recall when my mum was in her late 80’s, she needed some sort of ID (“like a passport or driving licence”) but by her stage in life, no longer had anything.
I’m not convinced that a digital only ‘card’ is the solution for older people.
My main concern is that it doesn’t become compulsory to carry one. Why should I suddenly be breaking the law for simply forgetting my phone?
I never forget my phone I don’t have one.
I’m broadly against it. I don’t think it will stop illegal migration, which is supposed to be a benefit, as people will come anyway as they do now, unless you believe they come because of our “loose labour laws and generous benefits” which we know don’t exist. Do we seriously think some app on a phone is going to stop the black market where these jobs are available. I don’t, for one minute. Undocumented people aren’t allowed to work now but they do, and will continue to do so.
You can’t out Farage Farage. It’s a grubby bit of politicing. I lived in France for years and carried my carte de séjour quite happily but the French take privacy seriously and wouldn’t put up with being filmed constantly the moment they leave the house.
This is a government which has just cheerfully handed over vast amounts of someone else’s IP to AI companies. Soon it will be our data, or we have a Reform government with their version of DOGE helping themselves to our data. OK there’s a lot of it out there now but it’s not bound into our daily lives.
We aren’t required to carry ID and no agency has the right to demand it without cause and that’s how it should stay unless someone says otherwise.
The “I have nothing to hide” argument fails instantly for me. That puts me the onus on you to prove it if they have a right to examine your ID, or you don’t have it with you, and they decide maybe you do have something to hide. Better that they leave you alone unless there’s a clear reason not to.
If Starmer wants to beat Reform he should focus on people’s real priorities, not refloat a failed Blair plan which failed largely because there were no quantifiable benefits and it would cost a fortune. These clowns spend 34bn on the COVID app IIRC.
The fact that it will help report potholes, apparently, says it all . This is a bad solution looking for a problem.
It’s surprising that Reform oppose the idea, unless it’s just a knee jerk. If Farage is serious about deporting 600000 people, including many who are in the UK legally, I would have thought a simple way of identifying and rounding up targets would be a boon.
I think it’s knee jerk, he knows it probably won’t happen or they’ll fuck it up so he’s laying a marker for blaming Starmer at some point.
The Covid App cost £35 million. It wasn’t introduced by “these clowns” but the Conservative government.
I think you are confusing it with the Test and Trace programme, which was allocated that budget, although it wasn’t all spent.
https://fullfact.org/health/NHS-test-and-trace-app-37-billion-instagram/
I
Yes probably. The clowns are the Civil Service and their outsource partners to be clear.
Some of the civil service is more accurate. And the process that is imposed on all projects and procurements. And you only read about the failures.
I’m sure that’s true but why do they continue to use suppliers who have demonstrated an inability to deliver?
The same suppliers who do deliver successfully for other customers. It’s the process, the fear of failure and the politics (often, the right answer doesn’t align with the direction).
The civil service no longer advises Ministers to the same degree as in the past. It doesn’t create policy. It enacts policy given by ministers who have 12 months departmental experience and will be in another role shortly.
It’s become normal practice for private-sector buddies of whatever government is in power to be parachuted into top civil service jobs.
Buddies who don’t necessarily know anything at all about the departments they’ll be running.
Meanwhile, experienced and knowledgeable officials see themselves blocked from the posts they expected to eventually be promoted into, so they leave and take their knowledge and experience into the private sector.
I spent 30 years in various departments. I am struggling to recall any IT triumphs. My wife still works within the criminal justice system, struggling everyday with pitiful systems
@Twang
Given how Starmer et al have repaid the wave of goodwill that propelled them into office, “a bad solution looking for a problem” is an equallly apt description of Free Gear Keir himself
Yes I wished them well despite not voting for them. To channel Blair, they fail to meet my lowest expectations. I cling onto the hope that they are actually doing good things but the RWP etc but as their crapness includes the ability to communicate what they are doing, so who knows.
Broadly with you here @Twang.
I have a pretty good professional understanding of the challenges of uniquely identifying things in a digital context, and for this to be done ‘properly’ – that is, effectively and with zero risk of exposure to failure, rather than with due regard to civil liberty – I can confidently say that it would cost what bean counters call an ‘absolute shitload’ of money. And it would cost a smaller amount – but still in the vicinity of shitload territory – to maintain the ongoing integrity of the scheme over time.
As regards civil liberty, I prefer to keep things as they are, ID-wise.
I can prove who I am, where I was born, who my parents were, who my siblings might be, to whom I am married and when and where did that marriage take place, the dates upon which I gained my motorcycle and car licences, by whom I have ever been employed, which GP’s surgery I am registered with, who supplies my electricity, where I live and where the juice is consumed and at which addresses have I ever previously lived. What the f*ck do I need another ID document for?
I can’t believe how inept this government has turned out to be, even though they were my choice at the last election.
And don’t get me started about the apparent gormlessness of even suggesting that we can all ‘simply’ store our ID on our f*cking smartphone. Tell that to the elderly residents in my village.
/incredulous disappointment rant mode
Poetry in Blog. But you will be able to report potholes more easily! They won’t fix them of course.
My friends and I have discussed this today.
We think there are more important things to fix at the moment than a digital I.d.
Yes, quite. My immediate reaction is that this just a rushed “we’ve got to be seen to be doing something/anything to stop illegal migrants” idea that will inevitably cost a squillion pounds and be riddled with problems.
Wouldn’t all that money and effort be better spent on improving the economy, tackling poverty, or maybe something inspirational or positive?
I don’t imagine many people outside Labour HQ have been saying, “You know what would really boost our run-down town? Extra bureaucracy that we can carry with us at all times!”
Also, if we must have such a thing, why must it be on our phones, where it can be hacked or otherwise misused? Luddite and cynic that I am, I don’t want my whole life story stored on one device, and I try to use my phone as little as possible. Couldn’t a card do the job just as well?
There seems to be a large part of the population (or at least a very noisy part) that believes that stopping immigration (and I think that’s all forms) will immediately make their lives better. I assume this announcement is an attempt to quiet them down. I’m not convinced that will happen.
I also wonder how much technical research has been done prior to this announcement. I’m assuming that a rooted Android phone would be quite happy to host a pirate version of the app.
As a trustee director for a couple of charities I have had to obtain a digital ID number as at some point in the near future it wont be legal to be a director without one. It was a clunky process that seemed to rely on my drivers licence and DVLA records as my passport chip wouldn’t scan, and i failed one of the security questions – I was unable to tell which one of 4 dates they showed was when I’d opened a bank account.
I’m not sure what extra security this process adds that a passport or drivers license doesn’t but I’m assuming it must add something. One fellow director has already resigned in a huff but he’s a GB News watching minor league bigot so something of a gain rather than a loss.
Given financial services companies still expect an actual bank statement, utility bill or council tax bill as proof of ID to supplement a passport or driving license and refuse to acknowledge that these are mostly digital these days (council tax isn’t but my names not on that one) it would be a relief if this ID moves them on. Beyond that it feels like this just isn’t something to get vexed about.
I’m currently registering my father’s power of attorney with multiple banks etc. The Coventry Building Society took a few details and did a “digital check’ and asked for scanned copies of the EPA and a couple of other items. It was relatively painless compared to the ones that want utility bills and other stuff that no one has now we’ve gone paperless.
Surely all your utility bills are on your phone these days? Everyone in London has that facility I’m sure. Just swipe here…
If you need anything like that on paper, you can generally print it yourself. Assuming you have a printer, that is.
One of the banks state that downloaded and self printed bills are not acceptable.
Then they should be offering an alternative verification method.
That’s not the case when your partner pays the bills and your name isn’t on the account.
^ this
I reverted from paperless (Save the planet!) to paper to be able to prove who I am to neanderthal companies.
I think the obvious course of action, if you can do it, is to avoid having dealings with such companies. If they are that stupid over this then they’re probably not much good in other respects either.
I think this might have been the French tax man.
N’en dis pas plus!
I had my tongue firmly in my cheek when I posed that rhetorical question.
Like almost everywhere in Europe, here in France we all have IDs. It’s a rarely enforced offence to always have it on your person- if you are involved in, for instance, a traffic accident you have 24 hours to produce it at the local police or mairie. Nobody gives it a single thought, no nonsense about loss of freedom etc.
Whether it will stop/cut down UK immigration is another question. The black economy knowingly uses non documented labour – “Got your ID mate? No? Start tomorrow.”
Same in Switzerland. I dutifully carried my “Ausweiss” around for 15 years either a B or a C permit. It never left my wallet, nobody ever asked to see it until I was de-registering to leave the country
I used my carte de sèjour once I think – whilst registering at a camp site.
“There will be no requirement for individuals to carry their ID or be asked to produce it, Downing Street said.”
There’s no requirement to carry your driving licence while driving, but if you can’t produce it when asked the police can give you a provider form and you then have a week (I think) within which you are legally obliged to take it to a police station for inspection and authentication. Failing to do so will result in your being summonsed to attend court.
Without an equivalent obligation for ID ‘cards’, and the (expensively executed) legal follow-up process, ownership of such a thing seems to have something of a rather weakened nature.
In Oz it’s an offence not to have your driving licence with you at all times – when driving, that is, not while you’re on the bog. This seems perfectly sensible – apart from anything else, where I live if you rocked up to the police station to show your licence you’d be lucky to find anybody in. I have a card in my wallet and a digital version on my phone.
I don’t have any particular objection to the idea of digital ID – as others have said, my entire life is firmly registered with the authorities already (in two countries in my case). My main objection is the danger of the sort of colossal Fujitsu-style fuckup we’re wearily familiar with already. If your digital ID is linked to all your other digital records, what happens if there’s a huge meltdown of the system and everything disappears? And that’s without even considering the possibility of hacking.
My feeling is that it won’t happen – not in my lifetime, at any rate.
This might cause some confusion, then…
Double arf!
Until they decide it is required. Once politicians and busy body organisations have powers they have an overwhelming desire to use them.
⬆️
Although farridge is against them now if god forbid he becomes PM then I think he’ll change his mind.
European nations have a longer history of people carrying ID. My German partner is always surprised I don’t, as a matter of habit, carry an ID card with me when out and about. Everyone here (Germany) seems to do it as a matter of routine.
Privacy laws in the UK are different. We’re essentially always open to the highest bidder, for anything and sod the ethics [at the right price of course]. One of the myriad reasons to loathe the prospect of a Farage in No 10 would be the notion that those shysters would stop at nothing to exploit the personal information of millions.
The last UK laws were introduced during WW2 and not abolished until 1952. The last prosecution, in 1950, is worth reading about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Willcock
A great man!
Quite recently some bloke arrived at (I think) Manchester station and the police were at the barrier asking to see ID and he declined to produce any, pointing out that they had no right to demand it. He was taken to one side and threatened with arrest and still refused and demanded to know on what charge this arrest would be made. In the end they let him go but you have to have some cajones to pull that one.
I’m with him. I’m not great with supposed authority figures. One of my few pleasant memories of school is when a teacher tried to rebuke me by saying, ‘You have no respect for authority!’ and I politely thanked him because it honestly didn’t occur to me that it wasn’t meant as a compliment.
In most cases, it’s counter-productive to refuse to identify yourself if asked by the police. But you should always ask them why they want to know.
If the police are claiming that you must identify yourself when asked, they must first inform you what crime it is that they suspect you of, otherwise you are under no obligation to do so.
They just make up some crime to justify the request. I’ve been stopped and had my car searched and given the third degree under just such circumstances.
That’s why I said that it’s generally counter-productive.
Arguing with the police is usually a bad move, as they hold a lot more cards than you do.
I completely agree. No point at all being a smart arse, or worse a “comedian”. Not that I ever have contact with any of them or even actually see them in the flesh. They seem to have vanished from our town. Actually a mate of mine is a detective in the fraud squad but he doesn’t count.
There are several “Auditors” that put their videos on you tube of (sometimes) fairly engineered encounters with the police. They know their rights and it’s alarming how many of the police officers involved don’t appear to know some of the basics. Or else they do but choose the route of arrogance and pressure to get their way.
I think they’d have serious trouble recruiting enough officers, if the legal training and the social interaction standards were made more rigorous.
The other thing to remember is the majority of recent immigration was entirely within the rules and those people will correctly get ID cards.
I was listening to something the other day (the FT politics pod) and apparently illegal immigration in the US has virtually stopped over the southern border. Rather like Australia, what seems to work is very robust military led enforcement, unfortunately. That’ll be next.
This is a good listen. It tells the tale of what happened when the military got involved before. I suspect there is no single right answer.
https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/revisionist-history/general-chapmans-last-stand
Thanks I’ll give that a go.
While we’re on the subject of cards. The shopcards eg Nectar. I find it a bit distasteful that Sainsburys can have ‘two tier pricing’ one for Nectar card holders and if you don’t sign up to give your details to Sainsburys you pay approx 25/30% more. It just doesn’t sit right with me.
Any thoughts?
Tesco appear to make up non Club Card prices to the point where no one would ever pay the claimed non member price. It’s not new and I’m sure it’s all legal but it does piss me off.
I’ve been asked a few times if a non card holder can swipe my card to get the “discounts” while I still get any points presumably, along with Tesco wondering why I’m suddenly buying dog food and women’s incontinence products.
I haven’t noticed any deliberate inflation of non-loyalty card prices. Supermarket prices are rising sharply at present anyway.
I see nothing wrong with special price reductions on selected items for loyalty card holders. It’s just an additional perk along with the spendable points you can accumulate.
The shops get lots of data to use about your shopping habits and in return you get points and special offers as their quid pro quo of you signing up for the cards.
There’s nothing to stop you getting yourself a card and gaining access to the card perks, if you think that’s a fair exchange for some purchasing data. Otherwise just don’t do it.
When I was working before retirement and using a company vehicle, we had company fuel cards to use at petrol stations. Including supermarket petrol stations.
It was an allowed perk to use your personal loyalty cards and keep the points, when using the company fuel card.
Don’t be tempted to get your sofa from DFS.
Tesco definitely inflate alcohol prices, especially spirits.
I worked an event years ago where the guest speaker admitted that when Sainsbury’s launched their original loyalty card, whatever it was called, about twenty five years ago or more, they didn’t have the ability to collect and utilise the information about who had bought what, which was definitely missing the whole point of the exercise.
I suppose there are other supermarkets you could go to. Or pay a bit more if you don’t want to join. This kind of retailing is hardly new or unique.
Pricing is emotive. People get hyperventilated about holidays being expensive in peak season without ever considering off season is often at a level of discount that is unsustainable.
Perhaps those holidays, being first-world luxuries, should be more expensive during the off peak season in order to render the whole industry sustainable in the longer term. It is, after all, sponging on the first-world’s unearned privilege at all times.
There is an argument that holidays are unsustainable. People are not willing to pay more for sustainability. Many people seem unwilling to pay for the NHS and education.
There’s a complete mental disconnect for a lot of people, between taxation and the necessary things that it’s paying for.
Thoughts? Go to Aldi or Lidl where the prices are the same or lower as the big two without resorting to loyalty card offers.
As it happens, this week we decided to stop at the Aldi en route to the Tesco Big Shop. The idea was to get what we could cheaper there and the rest of the shop, we assumed the majority of it, at the Tesco superstore. I don’t know if this is nationwide, but the local Aldi has really upped its game since we last went there a couple of months ago, especially with regard to fruit and veg, and we ended up doing the whole shop there.
If I get it together to do a plan for the week I go to The Lid as it’s known in our house, which requires a short drive to Letchworth. This is no biggie unless, as they often do, the council give permits to allow one of the main cross roads to be dug up and 4 way traffic lights installed which brings the entire town to a standstill. However, assuming I can get there a trip to the Lid saves me about £30 a week over the other option which is nipping to the Waitrose (aka The Trose) on a daily basis. Lid wine and Hortus gin is excellent and the meat and cheese is great quality. There are usually things they don’t have but they do have a battery disposal bin. Plus you can do Middle for Lidl and come out with a set of bedding plant tools or 30 coat hangers. What’s not to like.
In between the Aldi and Tesco there are a Waitrose and Lidl across the road from each other. We’re spoilt for choice, except that same road is closed after 8pm (which limits us as The Light commutes and I don’t drive) for the next fortnight.
A mate shares an industrial estate with a guy who supplies wholesale fruit and veg to supermarkets. He got fed up with mid market retailers rejecting whole deliveries on spurious grounds so he only supplies discounters now, ie Aldi and Lidl, because they never reject anything.
My experience is that Aldi veg can be poor and needs to be used within a day or two. There are exceptions of course but our local Aldi is often poorly supplied and some items have a short life.
Centre aisle: The Aisle of Shite.
I was in our local lidl once and just past the checkouts were some trays of fruit and veg with the sign STILL FRESH above “how much are they” “£1.50”
Decidedly good value though the grapes were on the turn.
It sounds like a practical solution to combat people arriving from elsewhere without documentation – but still being able to secure work regardless . If that wasn’t available anymore, then the only option is to enter the UK by legal means.
I suspect I will educated otherwise, but what’s wrong with that?
Whilst I am a strong supporter of both an identity card (and digital ID), I’m not sure that this will do anything to actually reduce illegal immigration.
I really can’t see the objection to an ID card – you effectively have anyway with your NI number and passport, so what’s the difference ? Having a single ID that can be used across all government (and even none government) will make life a lot easier (and cheaper) for everyone. It works in other countries, so why not the UK?
This an interesting article by James O’Malley, which should be free to read, on what he sees as the benefits of Digital IDs and also on how a lot of the infrastructure for them already exists.
https://takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/how-the-uk-digital-id-will-work
He is worth following in general on digital and other technology issues.
It’s good on how it might work, short of how it will prevent illegal working. That requires people doing checks in person, or very sophisticated automated processes I can’t imagine being rolled out quickly. And as we know, the people to do the checking will not appear. Whether this will stop illegal immigration is even less sure. As I understand it the goal is to get onto UK soil then hope things turn out ok. Not being able to get a phone app at some point in the future is the least of their concerns.
I don’t reject the idea out hand. It would benefit me as I don’t possess any photo id. No current passport, no current driving licence and a lack of photo id has caused me some minor hassles on a couple of occasions. However it doesn’t look like a universal rollout is at this present time being considered, just working age persons as far as I know so it’s all a bit moot personally. I do have concernes over security and what information could be added at a later date after the dust settles if any government decided to push the envelope on them and under what circumstances of how, what and where digital id could be checked, along with who gets to ask to check it. Then there is of course the matter of that small but significant number of people who don’t carry a smart phone or who aren’t even online. It all strikes me as a bit of performative politics, of which there has been far too much. “Looking like something is being done” while in actuality the only concrete thing that is being done over the vexed issue of immigration is floundering around in desperation. Labour need to find a way of wresting the narrative away from the right and changing the tune but that I’m afraid that is nowhere near doable in these febrile times and digital id frankly doesn’t even come close to scratching the surface.
Am I missing something here…this is being sold as something that will deter migrants as they won’t be able to work in the black economy but surely anyone working in that type of job is unlikely to be asked for any id anyway, cash in hand at the end of the day.
This scheme will cost a fortune to set up and will come in vastly over budget as all government projects seem to do, at a time when the money could be far better spent elsewhere on cash starved public services.
Is Starmer the most insipid mealy mouthed Labout prime minister ever?
I’m surprised Badenoch or Farage hasn’t resurrected Churchill’s joke about an empty taxi pulling up outside parliament and then opposition leader, Clement (a friend and former wartime cabinet colleague) getting out.
Then again, I guess it’s only a matter of time
Having lived with my Swedish personal identity number for many years, and having found that it makes life far easier for contact with banks, healthcare providers, the tax authorities, social services, gym clubs. telephone companies etc, I’m all in favour of a similar system for the UK.
There is no ID Card that I have to carry at all times.. If I need to prove my identity, my Swedish driving licence does the job. If you are a non-driver here, you can get an ID Card from the police.
Here is how the Karolinska Institute explain it all to vising students.
https://education.ki.se/bachelors-masters-studies/pre-arrival-guide/apply-for-a-swedish-personal-identity-number-personnummer
.
If I lived in a country with a non-benevolent state, I might not be so enthusiastic
Wouldn’t a non-benevolent state get you one way or another anyway, if it wanted to?
I’m sure it would, Diddley.
I just looked at the Guardian and saw that the Swiss have just voted for an electronic ID Card, but by a very small margin,
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/28/swiss-voters-back-electronic-identity-cards-in-close-vote
Voters rejected an earlier version of the e-ID in 2021, largely over objections to the role of private companies in the system. In response to these concerns, the Swiss state will now provide the e-ID, which will be optional and free of charge.
I find this detail vey odd..
To ensure security the e-ID is linked to a single smartphone, users will have to get a new e-ID if they change their device.
That doesn’t sound very efficient.
I don’t have a drivers license, and instead of the ID from the police I get the ID card from the tax office, which includes an e-ID as well as the card. But I’ve never activated mine, if you don’t want or need it you can just ignore it.
As I don’t have a mobile phone I just don’t see the point of activating it – on my computer I have Bank-ID so no need for an e-ID.
You very rarely need to show ID at my age, but I’d be nervous to leave my home without it – what if I was hit by a car and ended up in a coma? The hospital wouldn’t know who I was and that I need insulin and certain meds, and couldn’t tell my family where I was…not for a good while anyway. And speaking of medicine – the one place where I do need to show ID regularly is of course the pharmacy, for me/them to get access to my prescriptions!
I was wondering how long Sweden has had Personal Identity Numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identity_number_(Sweden)
When it was introduced in 1947 it was probably the first of its kind covering the total resident population of a country (the Social Security number in the United States is older by 12 years, but it did not originally cover the whole population). Numbers are issued by the Swedish Tax Agency (Swedish: Skatteverket) as part of the population register (Swedish: Folkbokföring).[1] Until 1967, it had nine digits, and after that 10 digits. This was expanded to 12 digits in 1997 in cases of automated data treatment.[2][3]
Naturally, Yes Minister had something to say on ID cards (“only the British will resent it”). Sadly I couldn’t find a clip of it on YT.
This one, maybe?
Excellent. Thanks , Sal.
Almost…they left out the bit I had in mind. Immediately after that clip (according to the excellent Hacker diaries), Frank asks whether the other EEC countries would oppose the Europass. Humphrey’s reply is “the Germans will love it, the French will ignore it, and the Italians and Irish will be too chaotic to enforce it. Only the British will resent it.”
Don’t really know what to think about this one, but I can break it down into three categories.
Conceptually, I’m always inclined to feel that we should be very careful indeed about handing more power to government at the cost of our own civil liberties. The lesson of the 20th century was that you have more to fear from your own government than any outsider, and that lesson seems particularly urgent given the steady creep of authoritarianism across the West.
At a more operational level, I have questions about the way this would all work and the government’s ability to effectively deploy, given recent shambles. But then, it’s an entirely fair point that plenty of other European countries seem able to do this and the world doesn’t end.
Finally, politically I don’t think this will work for the government at all. People do want something done about illegal immigration, but I’m not convinced they will tolerate a solution that effectively penalises the population as a whole. What’s being called for – rightly or wrongly – is for conditions to be made less pleasant for those who enter the country illegally, i.e. punishing people who are breaking the law. This feels a little like punishing everyone, and I’m not sure that will fly.
As I say, I don’t really have a strong view for or against here, but I don’t believe this policy will achieve its political goals, particularly given the way the government currently handles comms. Hopefully, I’m wrong.
Excellent. Thanks , Sal.
Unattached as this comment is, I will cut it out and keep it for those moments when I need a little ego polishing – thank you, KFD, you are a sweetie.
I have to follow all the Government’s digital initiatives for work, and I’m generally in favour of the proposal – with some caveats.
Digital identities can do a lot to make things simpler for people in dealing with public services, and help to make the processes more productive in the long term.
They could be abused; but that is the case for every power that government has. It needs a clear governance process with strict rules for when people should and should not have to show their identities, and when the data can be accessed.
And there is a danger of cyber hacks; but that is already there for every IT system in government and the private sector. It’s the way the world’s going.
There’s also a need to ensure that people who don’t have smartphones – who are more likely to need public services – are not cut out of the system. There has to be a back-up process, which is properly funded under which they can prove their identities.
And Starmer shouldn’t have announced it all in terms of controlling immigration. He should have played up a series of potential benefits rather than focusing on one issue; although that reflects his current preoccupation with beating back all the nutjobs in Reform
I expect there’s going to be political bloodbath over this in the next couple of years, but also that a majority of the public will support it.
Thanks for the hamper. What’s that? In order to send it you need my mother’s maiden name, the name of my first pet and my PIN? Well, if that’s what you need …
… and it’s gone. Good, frankly https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3385zrrx73o