All sides in UK digital ID debate firmly entrenched

Political leaders rise and fall, but they never really go away. Former Prime Minister of the UK Tony Blair, now reincarnated as a sleek nonprofit organization, has made a declaration: “it is time for digital ID.”

To be fair, Blair, the Executive Chairman of the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, has been saying this for decades. Digital ID was a project under his Labour government, which proposed biometric ID cards backed by a national database. That attempt, given fuel by the so-called Global War on Terror, made it as far as 2006’s Identity Act, which muddled about for four years before a change in government killed the project.

Now, as current PM Keir Starmer weighs his own digital ID project – a mandatory verifiable digital identity credential called BritCard – Blair stands, tapping his watch, not quite saying “I told you so,” but smirking to imply it. “The British public is running out of patience with a state that does not work, where interactions with public services are beset by inconveniences and delays even as outcomes slip and costs rise,” says a new paper from the Institute. “Citizens are rightly expecting the government to deliver common-sense solutions or make way. Digital ID is one such solution – and there is a massive political upside for those who embrace it.”

The argument pushes a mantra that sounds lifted from the film “Field of Dreams.” Build a system that works, and voters will respond.

Blair’s prior push for digital ID happened before smartphones

That’s far more likely to be true in 2025 than it was in 2005 – the same year Facebook came into existence, and two years before the launch of the first iPhone. Digital identity means something different than it did in the first decade of the twenty-first century. For many, phones are now gateways to banking, shopping, identity verification and authentication. With every EU member state mandated to offer a digital wallet to citizens by 2026 under the EU Digital Identity Wallet scheme, the use of digital credentials will only become more widespread.

Having lived with and through our phones for two decades, we trust the digital world much more than we did back then.

Blair and company suggest as much. “In a media landscape dominated by outdated narratives and unfounded fears, it may be easy to assume that no matter the benefits, the public will reject the idea of digital ID altogether. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

It quotes public-opinion research (which it commissioned) showing that “digital ID enjoys majority support among the British public, with 62 per cent in favour and just 19 per cent opposed.” There is support across the political spectrum.

“Most think digital ID is an idea whose time has come, with groups representing 75 per cent of respondents showing a net positive attitude,” the paper says.

The numbers indicate that public opinion has, indeed, shifted radically since the post-9/11 era.

“Digital ID systems are more secure, private and efficient than mechanisms in place today,” the paper says. “They minimize the amount of unnecessary information that people might have to share during everyday interactions – such as proving their age to buy a pint at a pub. They allow each citizen to obtain the services they need, when they need them.”

Immigration now, everything else later: rights groups decry BritCard plan

Nonetheless, digital ID remains a big nasty for many civil liberties and digital rights groups, who fear Starmer’s expected announcement on the rollout of BritCard, ostensibly aimed at deterring illegal immigration, will stifle human rights.

Big Brother Watch has joined a host of other critical voices in submitting a letter to Starmer, “urging him to abandon plans for a mandatory digital ID.”

The signatories argue that “digital ID would change our relationship with the state, cause irreversible damage to our civil liberties, and fail to deter illegal immigration.” Overreach is a constant concern: “although the current digital ID proposals are being considered in the context of immigration, there is no guarantee that a future government would not make digital ID a requirement to access a range of public and private services.”

“A mandatory digital ID scheme could be implemented in a way that is uniquely harmful to privacy, equality and civil liberties. It would require the population to surrender vast amounts of personal data to be amassed into population-wide databases which could be amalgamated, searched, and analysed to monitor, track, and profile individuals.”

The authors counter the Blair Institute’s figures with their own numbers: “the British public has reliably rejected every attempt to mandate ID cards since the 1950s, and more than 90,000 people have already signed a petition calling for you to reject the current proposals for mandatory digital ID.”

Ultimately, the authors declare that, “whilst mandatory digital ID might assist the Government to administer itself, it is unlikely to benefit the public. On the contrary, it would shift the balance of power towards the state with dangerous implications for our security, rights and freedoms.”

No silver bullet, but it can do everything: mixed messaging plagues digital ID

Is digital ID a boon whose time has arrived, or a boogeyman unleashed by the state to enable repression? Debaters on either side are unlikely to cede their positions, and with good reason: there is evidence to support both. Digital wallets can make life easier and more connected. Yet the current political environment demands interrogation of the risks, as things that once seemed outlandish slide into possibility.

The Blair Institute sounds a familiar note in its paper. “Digital ID should not be seen as either a silver bullet or a minor improvement to existing systems. Instead, it should be understood as a necessary piece of infrastructure that makes it possible for government to drive radical, effective reform across a wide range of policy issues.”

However, it also embraces a contradiction, in pointing to a “one-stop shop” model for government services: “a new model of public-service delivery by acting as the front door to all kinds of everyday tasks – from viewing records and tracking applications to reporting potholes or receiving reminders to vote.”

Starmer’s government, says the institute should make a digital ID “superapp” its flagship project. It recommends accelerating the integration of the existing One Login system in government departments, rolling out first use cases for right-to-rent and right-to-work checks.

“Ensure the system becomes the universal method for verifying identity, by issuing a verified One Login to every resident over the age of 18, with fallback systems – such as physical QR codes or kiosks to access the digital ID system in the cloud – for those who do not want or cannot use smartphones.”

And, finally, “adopt an iterative approach from the beginning that incorporates user feedback quickly and releases funding as milestones are achieved.”

There will, to be sure, be plenty of feedback to consider.

Article Topics

biometrics  |  border security  |  BritCard  |  digital ID  |  identity verification  |  Tony Blair Institute  |  UK digital ID