One of the main arguments put forward by the government for its digital ID card proposal seems to be: “If Estonia can do it, why not Britain?” The answer could be that the former Soviet republic is rather better at large-scale IT projects than the United Kingdom, which has – to put it politely – a mixed success in the field.
But assuming that the scheme is capable of being delivered “in this parliament” as the prime minister promises, and can justify the as-yet unspecified expenditure, there is an argument for its introduction. Yet many substantive questions remain.
According to the scant detail offered by Sir Keir Starmer, this digital ID scheme is principally about detecting and preventing “illegal migrants” from taking paid employment. Digital IDs will be mandatory for those seeking work and, presumably, those offering employment, who will have to check them. The aim is explicitly to stop such migrant workers from earning a wage. This would weaken one of the main “pull factors” that makes Britain an attractive prospect – plentiful under-regulated casual jobs, the “grey economy”.
That is, as it happens, one of the main issues that the French authorities raise when the British complain about the flow of people crossing the Channel; France, where possession of a national identity card is a requisite, may be a safe country in which to claim asylum, but it is much more difficult to get a job.
As Sir Keir himself puts it: “It is too easy for people to come here, slip into the shadow economy and remain here illegally.” His speech today marks a distinct change in time and language on immigration. For example, he now uses the term “illegal migrants” rather than “irregular”, and freely renounces even his own recent record on the issue.
“It is not compassionate left-wing politics to rely on labour that exploits foreign workers and undercuts fair wages,” he said. “The simple fact is that every nation needs to have control over its borders. We do need to know who is in our country.”
The Labour leader now talks about foreigners “undercutting” British workers in a way that he has never before and, like his new home secretary Shabana Mahmood, implies that restricting immigration is essential to retaining good community relations and a multiracial, multicultural society. Sir Keir calls this, in euphemistic terms, “the binding contract” that holds the country together. These are the kinds of arguments more usually associated with Conservative administrations in the more recent past. They constitute one response to the recent demonstrations and public unrest about irregular migration and accommodating asylum seekers in hotels.
It is equally unmistakably a response to the rise of Reform UK in the opinion polls – registering more support than Labour and the Conservatives combined. No wonder the prime minister continued to say that he recognises there is now “a battle for the soul of this country now as to what sort of country we want to be” underway. That is a sobering message indeed.
The timing of this announcement on the eve of a difficult Labour conference is therefore no coincidence, but it feels nonetheless like it has been brought forward rather hurriedly. It wasn’t in the general election manifesto, possibly because it would have caused an unwelcome distraction, and while designed and favoured by Starmer-friendly think tanks such as Labour Together and the Tony Blair Institute, it has been launched without the level of detail that might be expected from such an apparently major innovation.
As of now, the new digital ID will not be necessary to access, for example, NHS care, driving licences, childcare, social security or tax records, albeit it might be helpful. This is very different to the kind of universal one-stop ID that was attempted in the Blair government. The government is also clear that it will not be compulsory to carry digital ID, usually on a smartphone, in public places.
All of which begs the question about why this rather modest measure – in effect a digital photographic version of the old national insurance card of many decades ago – is being hyped up in this way. It is neither a “great leap forward” for digital Britain nor an attack on ancient civil liberties, but it is an additional security check on the right to work. Pensioners, for example, will have no need to apply for one and, once in a job, the “Brit card” may be safely forgotten about. It is not yet “Papers, please”.
The concerns instead centre on whether, how and when the digital ID remit will be widened so that it becomes a more intrusive feature of life, and what safeguards will be in place should that happen. One aspect that has certainly received less attention than it deserves is cybersecurity. Given what has recently befallen Jaguar Land Rover, Marks & Spencer, Co-op, airlines and, in recent years, the NHS, the consequences of a data breach affecting the work, health, driving, criminal, passport and tax records of every British resident are a terrifying prospect.
That is another reason why different databases must be impenetrably walled off from prying eyes. The work on a comprehensive digital ID system, if that is what it is to be, will take longer than one parliament, and a lot of persuasion to some highly hostile refuseniks.
Starmer’s digital ID plan is a ‘dead cat’ play – and it won’t stop the boats
‘Alarmism’: Readers say ID cards work well abroad as Starmer’s plan sparks division
The cyber hack on Kido nursery is every parent’s worst nightmare
Will Starmer’s Liz Truss jibe at Andy Burnham save his leadership?
This is not the time for Andy Burnham and his panicky supporters
