Views on UK digital ID scheme multiply among industry, public, privacy advocates

Government-led digital identity and the UK have a complicated relationship. It comes with a past: the national identity card plan spearheaded by Tony Blair’s Labour government in 2006 proved deeply unpopular, and didn’t last. The current engagement has been no less torrid, as public support and opposition on Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s digital ID proposal fluctuates wildly, certified biometrics providers ask if they’re being left behind, and questions about trust and inclusivity remain pressing.

Starmer digital ID plan on skids as public support craters

Amidst the tumult, the UK government is pushing a planned public consultation on plans for digital ID, originally set for this year, to 2026. According to an exclusive in PoliticsHome, the delay is partly because the policy was recently handed off from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) to the Cabinet Office. But it also reflects the general difficulty the government has had in selling the idea of digital ID to UK citizens.

The report cites a More in Common survey, which found that net support for digital ID had fallen from 35 percent in June, to negative 14 percent on the weekend after Kier Starmer’s September announcement on the UK digital identity program.

Leaders place some of the blame on misinformation. The BBC has already had to issue one apology, after a comedy program repeated a false claim that a company owned by Tony Blair’s son had been given the contract for the UK’s digital ID scheme.

Per the report, a Cabinet Office spokesperson tells PoliticsHome that “an expert team is working at pace to develop the proposals, learning from other countries – like Denmark and Australia –  who already have successful schemes, to create a system that is secure, convenient and inclusive.”

How to do digital ID in the UK: Westminster eForum tackles big questions

The question of what a healthy digital identity ecosystem in the UK would look like were on the agenda at the recent eWestminster Forum policy conference on digital ID. Much attention was given to the question of how to balance any new program with innovation and existing frameworks, specifically debates around the Digital Identity and Attributes Framework (DIATF). But a pair of panel sessions covered a broader slate of topics.

In a talk on implementation, governance and market dynamics, Catriona Melton, a legal director of tech and data for Kennedys, takes a look at how Part 2 of the UK Data (Use and Access) Act sets the stage for digital ID, and for identity verification that is “easier, cheaper and more secure.”

“It’s worth mentioning that the aim of part two is to develop a trusted market within the UK for DVS which people in the UK can access to prove their identity and other attributes,” she says.

Providers certified for DVS under DIATF will appear on the trust registry, and will be granted the use of a trustmark. A potential red flag for many is what Melton calls “perhaps the most interesting part” of the law – a so-called “information gateway” that will be accessible to DVS providers, who will be entitled to “request information at the initiation of an individual from public authorities.”

Melton makes a distinction between what Part 2 wants to do with DVS, which “was intended to be a scheme for people to access the means to verify their identity online,” and the government’s proposed mandatory digital ID scheme.

Part 2 is not yet in force; there are still legal and administrative hurdles. In the end, says Melton, it boils down to trust, and how to earn it.

“It’s clear that the success of the new DVS framework will depend on trust, and that trust depends on establishing a set of standards that are clear, legally certain and which at an operational level ensure security, privacy and wide accessibility and which are compliant with existing UK laws.”

Digital ID will work if it’s easy, beneficial and trustworthy

Stephanie Borthwick, a principal policy advisor at Which?, takes a consumer-centric view of the digital ID plan, going over benefits like data minimization, fraud protection and a better user experience. She also lays out some concerns consumers have over choice, quality, safety and redress; at the end of the day, there are people who, for instance, worry that biometric voice systems will not be able to understand their names. Ultimately, she says, “it’s important that consumers who use the government-owned digital ID in future will have the same protections as a private offering that would be regulated under the trust framework.”

Joseph Cordrey, senior operations manager for fintech platform Revolut, makes an obvious but potent point: “People should want to use a digital identity because it makes their lives easier. It should be as simple as possible with as few compromises or complexities as possible.”

Cordrey praises forthcoming secondary guidance on the licensing act that will enable customers buying alcohol to prove their age with digital IDs from DIATF-certified companies. “It’s a very simple, easy to understand use case that we should be leading with,” he says.

“The problem though is that whilst the licensing act has secondary guidance, nothing else seems to have secondary guidance or plan to have secondary guidance on mandatory accepting of DATF registered providers. So in some ways, your supermarkets will have a higher level of assurance required than a bank,” because while a supermarket will need to use a registered DVS for age assurance, “the bank doesn’t necessarily need to use a certified digital verification service or something under the DATF to verify a document.”

Once again, the ask is that government digital IDs be held to the same standard as those issued by DIATF-certified firms.

“The two things that we’re keeping an eye on are essentially, how are use cases for normal everyday people in normal everyday contexts being prioritized, if at all. And then how will potential consumers of those digital identities – supermarkets, gambling merchants, etc. – how are they able to understand their place in this situation? What they can and can’t accept from who, and provided by who? At the moment, it’s just a bit too messy to really understand very clearly.” Cordrey believes that adding mandatory digital identity on top of all that is “only going to flatten the adoption curve.”

The overarching message from panelists is that to sell digital ID to the public, it has to be fair, easy, transparent  and understandable. The biometrics and digital identity industry, at the moment, feels marginalized by the government’s plans – as though it has been shut out at exactly the moment when it should be engaged.

Biometrics, blockchain key tools in digitizing ID for refugees

Perhaps the only issue in the UK currently spicier than digital ID is migration. Dr. Emre Eren Korkmaz gives a talk on why digitization of identity matters to refugees. “From cash transfer to employment or social and security reasons, identification is very important and this is an important topic,” he says. Without ID, it’s much harder to have a bank account, receive aid, or access basic rights like education and housing.

Korkmaz runs down how biometrics and blockchain are becoming key technologies in the effort to make identity accessible to all, and particularly those who have been displaced and forced to seek asylum.

Digital ID, he says, can be used for exclusion and inclusion, and it’s important to discuss how to govern it – who should be excluded who should be included, and how to support people in vulnerable situations based on age, gender, disability or legal status.

Economic benefits of digital ID are huge: techUK

Laura Foster, associate director of tech and innovation for techUK, also discusses the economic and social impacts of digital identities – which, it turns out, are significant. “By the government’s own records,” she says, “the private digital verification sector already employs nearly 11,000 people in the UK. They generate over 2 billion in revenue, and that is set to double to 4 billion by 2030.”

“And what is really key about this industry is that it is a very heavily exporting industry. Thirty-four percent of UK headquartered digital identity firms have physical presence in other international markets, and of the top 20 of those firms, 57 percent of their revenue comes from international markets. So this is an industry that’s bringing a lot of revenue already from the UK and clearly has expertise that other nations are already leveraging. And critically, it is an industry that is set to scale.”

Rob Haslingden is the head of impact assessment and engagement at the Centre for Finance, Innovation and Technology (CFIT). Joining Foster as a panelist, he says that the organization’s market research shows resounding support for digital ID among UK businesses.

“There are enormous potential economic benefits as part of this,” he says: “as part of the coalition’s work that we’ve been doing the last 12 or 18 months, we’ve looked at the potential macroeconomic impacts of creating a digital company ID, and we calculated a potential 1.7 billion in compliance cost that could be saved by business in terms of having a verified digital identity for a business that was interoperable and could be shared securely and accurately.”

Home Affairs Committee hears from Tony Blair Institute, Big Brother Watch

Foster also spoke to the Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee in an all-evidence meeting on Tuesday, alongside representatives from the Tony Blair Institute, Big Brother Watch, the Open Rights Group and other witnesses.

The meeting focuses on “harnessing the potential of new digital forms of identification,” and the discussion was wide-ranging. A common theme, however, is how to win public trust, and all the questions that cascade from that: how many people want digital ID? How many people will use it? Could an Aadhaar-style mandatory digital ID ever fly in the UK? (To the latter, the answer is “almost certainly no.”)

Aside from trust, the key issue is inclusivity. Who gets left behind in a fully digitized society? What risks do algorithmic decision-making present to vulnerable populations? Many fear Starmer’s digital ID plan will be an excuse to implement draconian immigration policies.

At the moment, the government still appears keen to implement a digital identity scheme, but is starting to get cold feet. Some are already declaring it dead: Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, says she believes the way Starmer has rolled out his plan has killed support for digital ID in Britain. “It’s likely irrecoverable for this government and potentially for the next five to ten years.” She points to the petition objecting to the scheme, which has amassed nearly 3 million signatures, as evidence that constituents are “up in arms.”

As one might expect, the TBI’s director of government innovation policy, Alexander Iosad, argues that the big public pushback to Kier Starmer’s scheme is not a sign that the plan is dead in the water. In a blog published on PoliticsHome, Iosad says the UK “country needs an ambitious vision of digital ID that is about more than closing loopholes in our shadow economy. Done right, it can be the foundation of a new model of public services that just work: personalised, preventative, always accessible. It can safeguard our rights and enable the state that treads lightly on people’s lives.”

People will want digital ID, he says – if you make sure to do it right.

Those who might provide said digital ID, however, were not among those invited to speak to the select committee. As Richard Oliphant points out in a post on LinkedIn, “this is akin to hosting a meeting with football writers and armchair critics to discuss the future of the Beautiful Game, but not bothering to invite the players.”

“The UK needs a deep and nuanced debate about digital ID,” Oliphant says. “It must focus more on the social and economic benefits, and less on scaremongering about immigration. The DIATF and the 40+ certified identity providers are central to this debate.”

Article Topics

biometrics  |  BritCard  |  consumer adoption  |  digital ID  |  digital identity  |  GOV.UK Wallet  |  Richard Oliphant  |  techUK  |  Tony Blair Institute  |  UK  |  UK digital ID