UK to roll out mandatory digital ID for right to work by 2029 The UK government plans to issue all legal residents a digital identity by the end of the current Parliament, which could run until August 2029, with its use required to get a job. "Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the UK," said prime minister Keir Starmer. "It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, …
I had some blowhard in the pub earlier suggesting to everyone, because he was so loud, that ID cards were a brilliant idea. Someone challenged him on what they would achieve and he said they’d stop illegal immigrants from working in the UK. He also seemed to think that fellow pub enthusiast and Rothmans smoker Nigel Farage was in favour of ID cards too. It was then pointed out, by means of a Xweet from the man himself, that he actually wasn’t in favour https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1971258492687352012
Nigel Farage MP @Nigel_Farage
I am firmly opposed to @Keir_Starmer’s digital ID cards.
It will make no difference to illegal immigration, but it will be used to control and penalise the rest of us.
The state should never have this much power.
The blowhard looked visibly shocked and says loudly “Bloody Hell Nige, has gine soft!”. He then downed the remainder of his pint and walked out. Someone on my table said “It’s a fecking weird world where I agree with something Nigel Farage has sais.”
Nigel "Fascist" Farage will say whatever he thinks will get him some attention and like all populists, he's an authoritarian who will strip anyone who dissents and disagrees with him of their rights and abilities to take power from him.... He'll say he's against it, but he'll be loving the thought of the power and control it would give him over the populace.
Imagine masked groups of racists... sorry... border patrol roaming the country...if you don't like you should belong in this country to them (white), they'll haul you off to some camp for deportation... Don;t believe me... look what his bosom buddy trumplethinskin is doing... everything Forage does is inspired by the nazi party in the US... he just waters it down a little more to make it more palatable to the racists in the UK who think they're not.
He may be a right-wing dick, but he is not a Trump-level fascist.
He's an inhabitant of the same golden elevator (google it).
Trump, Farage, Bannon, Musk, Le Pen, Meloni, etc. etc. are all the same people. They are all linked by the same dark money, and they all have the same goals.
The roll-out had barely started in 2010 when Tories pledged to scrap it, *and* they had the Lib Dems and a huge deficit to keep them honest on it. It would be a different matter with an entrenched system because the money saving argument wouldn't apply nearly so much (it might even cost more to scrap than keep).
It's an absurd suggestion that a digital ID card would make any difference to illegal work. Normal legal employers already do checks. Illegal employers just don't bother, with or without an ID card is all the same to them. The work gets done and cash is put in hand. A lot of illegal work is actually done via arm's length employers like food delivery apps. They already do ID checks, but the illegal workers just rent an account with the ID check already passed. There seem to be lots of people prepared to ill-advisedly rent out their ID for surprisingly small amounts of money and they will continue to do so with or without ID cards. The problem there is nothing that ID cards will solve, it's the fact that the employer doesn't regularly see the employee in person.
Seems more likely to increase the amount of work done illegally by those entitled to work by adding to difficulty (and cost) of being an employer, especially individuals needing part-time carers or helpers. There are also many categories where nobody seems sure if OK to work online: those in prison, Brits resident abroad, under 16s.
And no intent to have a system seems to reflect a plan to have at least three. Another for NHS, another for benefits. Sounds like a serious waste of money, and no mention of sorting out the eye-watering costs of ineffective AML. (A presentation to parliament a whiole ago indicated the 90% of benefit fraudsters were not hiding their identity, so ID can't fix more than 10% and might facilitate rather more if as insecure as one.login which has escaped mention. FBI also testified that the 911 bombers were not hiding their identities.)
It does seem that few honest people are aware of the opportunities for coercion and blackmail that ID cards offer, but perhaps that's only an issue for the sectiosn of society that we don't care about?
Since the Estonians always get mentioned, why not look at what they did (and the bumps on the way): provide a way for Estonian companies to go all-digital without blocking inward investment (with e-residency for non-resident non-national who might be shareholders, directors, or taxpayers), and for the public sector to provide digitally in a system where benefit payment is based on entitlement not claim.
Why a new consultation when we haven't seen the resuts from the last one? (Answer: that was parliamentary, this is government.)
Making a petition that insures the new digital ID law includes very stiff penalties for employers who fail to validate the digital ID every employee and are found hiring someone not authorized to work in the UK. Because it is unlikely a petition is going to stop this unless a clear majority of people are against it, and I imagine most are fairly apathetic because it won't really affect them in any way positive or negative.
If it is anything like in the US, the enforcement and penalties are always against the workers, with nothing done to employers except in a few token very egregious cases to make it look like they're enforcing that (and that has been true under administrations of both parties for decades)
Putting all the enforcement on the employees allows employers to continue hiring people they aren't allowed to hire, and treat them poorly because they know the employer can call the cops on them and the worker will be hauled away while nothing is done to the employer. He'll just find another illegal immigrant to hire and treat poorly with below legal wages, mandatory unpaid overtime, dangerous working conditions, etc.
If you enforce things on the employers enough that they actively try to avoid hiring illegals that solves the problem without much border enforcement required - they won't come to the UK (or US) to work if they know no one is going to hire them.
Did they change the definition of authoritarian to mean “Weak” or “ineffective”?
The chances of this happening in the next ten years are zero. They are “consulting” which is government code for asking Fujitsu what they think. It will take Fujitsu years to build something that doesn’t work and is definitely racist before someone else gets in and scraps the whole lot.
When I heard “oh you won’t need this to get treatment on the NHS “ I thought “why the fuck not?”. Then I realised: it’s a horse shit idea with no actual intention of becoming a reality. Our IT projects are worse than our fucking rail and road projects.
Yeah, that was tried with Brexit, there were marches which were attended by around a million, there was also a petition with many millions of signatures.
They were ignored or dismissed.
Even though the area I live in was over 60% remain, our scumbag MP voted it through and told all the constituents who contacted him to complain that he wasn't there to represent us.
Since then I've not considered myself represented and have no faith that any party will represent me, this ID card bullshit and Starmer's taking the knee to Farage has confirmed there is no point to voting.
The only atom thin silver lining is that the Tory arsehole lost his seat in what was previously considered a blue monkey constituency
Perhaps just deliver on promises to mae existing ID Dihital and don’t reinvent the wheel and maybe if some use in the real world.
Digital Passports, Digital Drivers ID.
Got a text from Royal Mail asking me to lock up a parcel that was sent to local Post Office “Don’t forget this pick-up code” the SMS sent. What is didn’t say was the jobseekers tossers in the PO wanted some ID - which I didn’t have as I had whipped out on lunch-break.
I have a photo of my Passport, or driving licence or I. A show you a copy of an eBank Statement, or HMRC on-line which should be reasonable proof of ID??
‘No we need originals … we don’t accept Digital Copies’
‘What not even of the text J showed you with the pickup code’
Sullen look and denied….. until I wasted a further 30 mins going to get ID.
Analogue fuckers.
There are already right to work checks and portals for employers to validate them.
"So you don't want to adopt a system that literally makes life less of a hassle."
Yes. Less of a hassle for hackers, bad actors in and out of government and historically how bad it is to have such an easy lookup of peoples information.
"Most countries in Europe have had some equivalent for a decade."
Yes and we can clearly see how it does not solve that illegal immigration problem as claimed by Starmer. The UK did not fall to the 'papers please' Soviet nor Nazi schemes and dont trust authoritarians not to go that way.
"Instead i've got to maintain 15 different irritating systems to maintain general daily occurences."
Guessing you dont live here. What daily occurrences are you claiming? Who is stopping you asking for your papers comrade?
I was told I would need to apply for one, male, David, and one female, Chloe, depending on how I was presenting.
You can believe what you want. But as you are wrong, there's only one Michael here, and you can find it in the mirror.
(I always love it when someone tells you your personal experience is wrong, I guess I must have a fscking lot of stalkers, as they always know how things that actually happened to me are made up)
I was told I would need to apply for one, male, David, and one female, Chloe, depending on how I was presenting.
Who told you that? Tony Blair?
As I said in my previous post, ID cards never left the drawing board stage of planning in the UK. It certainly didn't get to the point where a phalanx of customer support bods were hired to field questions from 60 million people in the country.
Regardless, mandatory ID is just one of the walls of our rapidly constructed global digital prison. The next two will be the cashless society and CBDCs. At that point, the system accurately representing how you present will be the least of your worries.
"As I said in my previous post, ID cards never left the drawing board stage of planning in the UK." apart from the ones issued, and you could apply for them. Sure. never left the drawing board.
Fscking hell, I can feel my braincells committing suicide with this level of ignorance.
That is not correct. I did some consultancy for a SI that was building back-end software that was supposed to run the ID card system. The bit I was working on was intended to pull photos from the DVLA if a user already had a photocard drivers license so that they did not need a separate photo. There was definitely quite a lot more than drawing board work done even if none of it ever saw the light of day.
1. It's going to cost a lot of money.
2. It won't solve the problem proposed since the problem is businesses not enforcing the existing checks. (Ergo, you would be better off spending the money on enforcing the existing laws.)
3. Future politicians will extend it to do much more than is currently promised, especially when they see (1) how much it has cost for (2) how little effect.
Oh, they're doing 'something', okay. Meanwhile, they're planning to get people used to these 'Digital ID's' so there's less objection to extending the use. Oh, and figuring out a way to misdirect the public as to why Digital ID doesn't impact illegal migration.
After all: Identity theft already exists. And illegal migrants get illegal work without ID already. Worse is where they're not given a choice over it. There is still such a thing as human trafficking and it's not always sex trafficking: There was a case of fruit pickers being trafficked/forced labour that came to light when their transport crashed and they fled. Police managed to find them and expose the gang behind it, and that was bad enough, but the fact the farmer was employing them in the first place... there's way too many entities out there that will simply 'forget' or 'not realise' they need to check for right to work already (which is already required): They're not going to look at digital Id's when they're introduced.
So no, digital ID's will have zero impact on the illegal workers, but opens the door to abuse in the future. After all, we know damn well anything introduced for purpose A will quickly be used for other purposes: Way too many examples of that happening already.
A more effective way of checking right to work would be to remove cash from the economy and make all transactions digital...
If *every* payment from everyone could be audited, there would be a much bigger incentive for the employer to check who they were actually paying than when they are choosing whether to look at an ID before handing over an untraceable £50 in used notes.
Ignoring the lack of privacy of having all your transactions logged, it's very unlikely to happen, because there are still plenty of people who can't cope with money unless they can count the actual notes and coins.
"A more effective way of checking right to work would be to remove cash from the economy and make all transactions digital..."
Right, like how digital payments have stopped ransomware, romance scams, investment fraud, advance fee fraud, and the million other types of crime that result in the electronic transfer of money that then just goes "poof" and vanishes beyond recovery?
Let’s say I’m a middle of the road people trafficker with a few slaves at my disposal. I have some stolen identities I use to set up Deliveroo / just eat delivery drivers and bank accounts. I send my slaves out to do the work and legitimate payments are made to my legitimate identities’ legitimate bank accounts. Pretty sure whatever checks involved can be spoofed.
Alternatively I set up a legitimate mini market and sell crack cocaine listed as dolly mixtures using my legitimate payment processing systems taking payment from my customers legitimate smart phones.
How did ID cards digital or otherwise stop this?
Given the number of times payment systems have failed in shops, then that (digital only) is bound to fail (though control freaks love it). And is exclusionary of those who do not buy in to use of computers, phones etc. (may be old, may be poor, blind (possible to distinguish notes & coins by "feel" - ironically I find best way to spot most fake notes is by initial "feel", lots of (some subtle, some overt) texture differences on UK notes - very rare visual inspection needed ), may have addiction issues e.g. if you have a gambling addiction really do not want temptation of a smart phone with a huge number of gambling apps available to install at the flick of a digit)
I use cash most of the time* (& avoid "loyalty cards" etc.), as I do not want to be tracked, even though my life is fairly mundane (too much time on caring duties for older relatives to e.g. attend demonstrations these days) - just because I like the concept of individual privacy**.
* Typically boycott card only shops - only time I pay by card is an "emergency purchase" & only available option is a card only shop.
**Yes I know that is difficult in the UK with CCTV so prevalent (& ANPR for those who drive)
.. and those old enough to remember over 20 years ago, over 20 "illegals" died in one day, drowned whilst cockle picking in Morecambe Bay.
As you said @Helcat, not just the stereotype of the sex industry (but that is probably helpful as an example to get people angry about trafficking)
Would be interesting to know, since EU exit (& so harder for legit fruit & veg pickers to travel from EU to seasonally work in UK) if number of "illegals" in agriculture has increased (there were always some, as obviously cheaper than legit labour)
I was going to say exactly the same.
Last time I think LSE estimated it would cost close to £15B, not the £5B that Blair was claiming, and I doubt this will end up any cheaper. Given the government's piss-poor record on big IT projects (of all political shades) and the likelihood of feature creep adding cost and taking away liberty it seems a bad idea. Better spending a few £1B more on enforcement and border control that works.
I shall do my best to read said smoke signals!
You could always try our own mandatory, but not compulsory card instead of this digital nonsense.
"This is not like an ID card where you would be asked to show it as you are moving around."
Want to bet?
Of course future governments will want to use this scheme as a means of controlling the population.
... everyone will have to accept a digital ID
Oh?
I don't have any kind of mobile 'phone so where will the government store it?
As far as I am concerned they can shove it up their arse. Maybe that will suffice.
Given that we’re already seeing the creep from “age verification” to digital IDs for employment, of course the scope will expand as required.
After the next terrorist incident? You need to show ID to access public transport, entertainment venues, sports events, public buildings etc.
Want to cut down on theft? Show your ID before you enter a retail establishment.
See how easy it is?
shock! people still go into shops? I thought that old pagan tradition had died out years ago.
If you can't get it on Amazon and your local instant delivery company can't get it, what is the point in living!
BTW, do underage teenagers buy booze via your local delivery comp or give the bloke a fiver to prove to an online site that you're over 18? Just askin'
All it needs to be is a digital signing service - you can carry the resultant doc in whatever format you like. Absolutely no need for central databases or any of the things than actually cause potential data infractions.
You have a set of docs with different subsets of information, and present the least data document when it's required.
There is absolutely no need for Digital ID at all. As others have already said on here, those that are here illegally and/or are working illegally will simply ignore the new law.
This isn't about controlling illegal immigration. It's about controlling all of us. They won't say that now, but give those b@stards (of both main colours) enough time, they will find or create a false flag reason for mission creep.
This isn't the main plan either. They're planning on creating a digital currency and will eventually link that with your digital ID. After that, say the 'wrong' thing, or post something online that the gov doesn't agree with. Say goodbye to access to public services and/or limit where you can travel to/from, where you can buy things from.
They can f*ck off if they think I'm going to apply for this bullsh!t ID
In which case there's no need for any ID.
Why should your drivers license be a forgeable bit of plastic, when a digital signature is so easy to validate.
Same question for passports, and a whole host of other documents.
By having signed documents you aren't actually changing anything you do, and you're not creating the hackable target database which always seems to be the fear of many.
You're simply having a way for documents which already exist to be verified without having to have remote access to a database which looks like a very juicy target for ne'er-do-wells.
What is it about putting a digital signature on existing documents that would allow for denial of public services?
A digital ID could be done correctly and safely provided its scope was limited. That is true.
It won't be and it won't.
And that's before we get on to the government's ability to run a database.
Did I ever mention that time I was working for the Home Office and watched someone trying to install an SSL certificate? I don't remember how it turned out; I lost interest after two weeks. But don't worry it wasn't anything important, it was only the system for issuing passports.
"A digital ID could be done correctly and safely provided its scope was limited. That is true.
It won't be and it won't.
And that's before we get on to the government's ability to run a database."
Oh I am under no illusions that they'll even *try* to do it correctly, but it's the right way to introduce digital ID.
We already have various forms of ID, useful for various things - different information available to different organisations. Sign these already existing forms of ID and immediately you have a suite of digital IDs with no backend database required, and separation of information.
But if all tech people ever say is "no" then we'll be ignored. There are mechanisms here which don't result in new database targets, or data trawling, and we should be highlighting those. And when we suggest those here, then when it comes to something important (like electronic voting) an outright no will carry substantially more weight.
Because let's be real - the vast majority of us already have multiple forms of government ID.
The stated aim is clearly not going to magically happen without enforcement, but it *might* this make enforcement easier:
Compare it with the "are you a terrorist" question on immigration forms. That question isn't used as a check on terrorists, but it gives authorities an easy charge to lay before the courts in the event that they catch a foreign terrorist later.
Does nothing to protect against domestic terrorism, does nothing to protect against that first attack, but does have an effect further down the line.
The "didn't check the certificate" charge is easy - either there is a signed doc or there isn't. It's not necessarily making it harder to break the law, but making it harder to claim that good false documents were presented. There will absolutely be companies that ignore the cert entirely, or that happily accept the same document for several people.
Is that easier to detect and charge? No idea, but it is possible.
"Nige doesn't like it."
He may be saying he doesn't like it, but you can bet your arse that he and his far-right associates will make full use of it in keeping tabs on those who disagree with them should Reform win the next General Election - and I have to say that in making his announcement, Starmer has very likely (in my opinion) handed Reform victory on a plate!
My thoughts precisely.
After pissing several billion quid on the porcelain the UK will have a system that a) wildly inaccurate b) unreliable c) incomplete d) late and overbudget and doesn't work at all in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Yorkshire and poorly elsewhere but works a treat on Sark even though the Channel Islands would presumably be out of scope.
I can envisage that a system failure could lead to most of Reform's membership being deported to Rwanda but arguably not so much a failure as an unanticipated or serendipitous behaviour.
The criminal fraternity then discover your common garden variety Oyster Card works just well in proving you are John Smith to this system.
I recall many years ago reading Bruce Schneier piece where he demonstrated the inadvisability and undesirably of these one-ring-to-rule·them·all digital identity "solutions." (That is apart from binding them in darkness. ;)
"doesn't work at all in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Yorkshire"
It won't work in Scotland because the SNP will insist in kicking off their own ScotID scheme that will be, hard to believe I know, even more ineptly planned and implemented. See also Scotland's NHS app.
"It won't work in Scotland because the SNP will insist in kicking off their own ScotID scheme that will be, hard to believe I know, even more ineptly planned and implemented. See also Scotland's NHS app."
Worryingly, the Scottish Government has already been doing a lot of all-consuming many-tentacled data-slurping for several years now, in the guise of the "National Entitlement Card" (a name which to my ears sounds rather chilling, in the sense of "if you (eventually) don't have one, you're not entitled to any public services (or to be here?)").
This is, for now, essentially the free bus travel card for young or disabled or old(ish) people, but from what I'm aware of it (being neither young enough nor old enough to have one) there already seems to be a fair amount of back-end database creepiness associated with this, including all sorts of identity documents needing to be sent to dubious third-parties (Yoti?) in order to actually get one, and I think a not entirely covert plan for it to extend its tentacles into further public services.
Unfortunately, most people just see this as, yAy, FrEe StUfF (in what world of excessive governmental electoral bribery do 60 year olds (a good number of years from pension age and in most cases at the peak of their earnings career) really require free bus travel?), and insufficient alarm bells are ringing, not helped by the fact that we don't really have Scottish tech/liberty/privacy orgs here, and the (so-called) UK ones suffer from the perennial anglo blinkered vision of being (insufficiently) unaware that what happens in England rarely actually applies to (m)any of the other countries of the UK…
"UK ones suffer from the perennial anglo blinkered vision of being (insufficiently) unaware that what happens in England rarely actually applies to (m)any of the other countries of the UK"
Not in this case. Issuing passports and driving licences are reserved matters. Which means the unfit for purpose Home Office gets to decide. Scotland had a chance to fix this in 2014 but they crapped it.
[Original AC]
I was referring specifically to the Scottish National Entitlement Card and how all the database creepiness that got shoehorned into that sadly seems to have gone by largely unnoticed, because most civil rights organisations have only an England view/focus (and that they often don't even realise that looking at things only/mostly from a Westminster/England perspective prevents them from seeing what happens in the other nations: functional awareness of devolution, let alone the Scottish legal system, is sadly really very woefully poor among English-and-England-based staff members of nominally UK-level NGOs - their background sadly makes too many of them (seemingly) simply incapable of comprehending that things can and usually do work differently in the countries of the UK that are not England).
(Indeed, obviously UK-level identity documents/systems are a matter for the UK Government.)
I doubt that anyone in the government, especially those concerned with security in any way, has ever heard of Bruce Schneier, let alone taken the time to listen to the very sensible and well considered things he says. They're far too busy emulating that other grifter Pob Michael Gove, when he said something or other about how good little subjects shouldn't listen to experts and just do what they are told to by their betters.
Culture secretary Lisa Nandy told BBC Radio 4's Today that everyone will have to accept a digital ID but would not need to carry the means to show it at all times. "They won't be required to use it on a daily basis," she said. "This is not like an ID card where you would be asked to show it as you are moving around."
Asked by presenter Nick Robinson what would happen in the event of a check on whether those working for an employer had the right to work, Nandy said: "You wouldn't be required to have that with you at the time, but you would be required to have a digital ID and produce that."
So you won't need to carry an ID card, but you will need to carry a smartphone to work and open the app and show it to your employer when told to.
By the way, there are plenty of countries where the ID card is optional for their own citizens and/or they don't need to carry it with them.
I live in one of those countries and can confirm not everyone has an ID card and we are not required to carry any ID.
However any LEO deciding at his sole discretion that someone did something suspicious can ask for ID and if none is produced take the subject to the nearest guardhouse for identity verification.
Not sure if you folks in Blighty want that kind of "optional" ID.
On the other hand if you already carry a smartphone all the time the possibility of ID cards being used to build a location profile should not be your biggest concern.
Not sure if you folks in Blighty want that
I think it's already the case. If you refuse to give your verifiable name and address and you are suspected of committing a crime you can be arrested until your identify is confirmed. If you're suspected of antisocial behaviour, failure to identify yourself is a criminal offence in itself.
"However any LEO deciding at his sole discretion that someone did something suspicious can ask for ID and if none is produced take the subject to the nearest guardhouse for identity verification.
Not sure if you folks in Blighty want that kind of "optional" ID."
As far as I am aware, in the UK if a police officer needs to determine an individual's identity and is unable to satisfactorily do so then they *already* have the authority to detain the individual until identity is determined.
You're right, the location data part of a digital ID should not be our biggest concern. The biggest concern is the mission creep that will inevitably happen. They're going to link the digital ID with a digital currency. When that happens, they have all the data they need to monitor and control every aspect of our lives.
Liebour are dissembling. Quelle surprise! They're positioning ID cards as a voluntary thing that only needs to be shown to a new employer in the hope this will minimise resistance from the public: "it won't affect me any time soon, so why bother?". But once this clusterfuck gets under way, it'll be too late to stop it once the Home Office's real intentions are out in the open and ID cards are mandatory for everything.
So you won't need to carry an ID card, but you will need to carry a smartphone to work and open the app and show it to your employer when told to.
Yeah. That makes it *so* much better. There''s nothing to worry about. Big Brother will take care of everything for us and nothing will ever go wrong.
How about, lets do a one in, one out system, like we are doing for asylum seekers.
Every time someone is *rejected* a digital ID card. Only then is a digital ID card assigned to a eligible person. Lets see how far that gets.
Sounds to me, this is just another way to track people online. No doubt porn sites will be convinced to use this as valid ID.
My 'phone runs LineageOS as I do not want google to suck up everything. I do online banking but not on my 'phone - these devices are too easily stolen or compromised; I have much more confidence in my desktop that runs Debian Linux.
The other thing that this will do is to closely tie a 'phone to a person which will enable much easier tracking of people:
• the cell towers that know where the 'phone is now know where a person is
• browse the Internet from your 'phone - much easier to see which sites a person has visited
This would have been the Stazi's wet dream.
I can see legitimate uses of ID but it has to be legally super narrow and well defined. e.g. to avail of government services - welfare, revenue, driving license etc. That's how Ireland does ID - it's a public services card and nothing else.
I do not see how it would possibly be tolerable to go beyond that. It's political suicide in fact and I do not understand why Starmer or Labour would even go this route or allow the narrative to go nuts. Who are they trying to please? The sort of far right loons protesting immigrants are also the same far right loons protesting mask mandates so they're not going to be happy. And who on the left wants this crap either? It's sheer lunacy. If the intent was to crack down on fraud then do it the Irish way - it's a public services card, nobody outside of government has any legal entitlement to see the card - not the cops, not individuals, not businesses.
The funny thing is Tories don't tend to like this sort of thing - it's "government overeach", they're all about the small-state. I really don't see who he is selling this to. No one has asked for it.
I've actually got no issues with a government ID; I work on software that makes use of the EU eiDAS scheme, it's great and being able to digitally sign a contract is really useful. But this is just red meat. The problem it's trying to solve is already solved, with employers being on the hook for £45k if they employ someone without a right to work, and any goals this scheme has outside that are unspecified.
Despite being a died in the wool lefty I am fucking livid with Starmer because every stupid thing like this he does opens the door for Reform. I have never seen such a large majority and public goodwill pissed away in such a short period of time.
Incidentally, my flatmate at the time was a government lawyer working on the old ID card system. I forget who they had to work on it (Fujitsu, Capita etc) but the contracts were written so they were paid out no matter, in the certainty it would be axed by the next government. It will be the same this time around.
A friend of mine is friends with a number of high court judges who know Kier from his time as a lawyer. "Nice guy, not a policitian" is apparently their take; they're all Tories so I had largely discounted this as sniping, but I'm not sure I can disagree any longer.
Judges are supposed to be politically neutral, but B.Liar [ANOTHER Human Rights lawyer] deliberately politicised the Judiciary, https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/turning-lord-chancellor-into-just-another-politician-was-a-mistake/70871.article knowing it would come in useful in defending the Governments view of what is and isn't a crime. The first thing extremist governments do is take away the people's right to choose.
Digital ID is an enabler for that.
Because Left Wing politicians cannot resist the urge to control and dictate [although extreme Right Wing is just as bad], this lot got in because the previous lot couldn't stop fighting amongst themselves and the electorate were fed up, so voted with their feet, i.e. they didn't vote at all, so a large majority in Parliament came from a minority vote. Which has resulted in the chaos we have now.
A LOT of people will vote in the next GE, because they are seriously pissed off and want rid.
"I have never seen such a large majority and public goodwill pissed away in such a short period of time."
This government started off with a really good strategic approach to government in the six missions, the clearest, best thought through plan for government I've seen in all my years.
Unfortunately, before they even started they had foolishly tied their own hands by committing to no major tax rises, and since then they've been sabotaged by events on the people side - Rayner, Siddiq, Gray, McSweeney), their own policy and performance failures (migration, Gaza), and by their own backbenchers who are mentally in the student union bar and want higher public spending. All of which have distracted from the missions, and provoked a shambolic and misguided cabinet reshuffle that has achieved negative results.
You do have to wonder how ID cards suddenly become a government policy? I assume Downing Street political staff all sitting around despondent, not an idea of any worth between them; the polls show the relentless rise of Reform, and some shrill voiced idiot squeaks "ID cards! That'll restore our electoral fortunes, everybody will want one!"
In terms of goodwill, I'm not sure Starmer ever had any. Less people voted Labour in 2024 than did in 2019, and Starmer's starting approval rating was a fairly dismal 36% and it's been downhill ever since with latest figures showing him having a lower approval rating than the despicable Johnson at his lowest.
TBH what did you expect?, none of the government have EVER held down a real job, they are spectacularly unqualified, and if they don't have the qualifications or experience, they lie. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has ZERO expertise in Economics, even less than an O level in Economics would get you.
The skeletons are falling out of the cupboard almost weekly, two weeks ago Rayner, one week ago Mandelson, this week 700k in undeclared contributions, that's before free clothes for all from Lord Ali, the levels of grift and malpractice are breathtaking.
If the Labour Party were in opposition, Twatter would have gone into meltdown with the deafening screams of 'resign', 'General Election'..
I will freely admit that I voted for Labour in the absence of any other sensible option, and they're spectacularly shooting their own feet.
However do note, not that it makes it right in any way whatsoever, the Tories were worse, there were screams of general election and *naff all happened*. The Tories won a landslide in 2019 despite everyone knowing exactly what sort of person Johnson was if they'd spent even five minutes to look. The only thing that started heavily shifting polls in Labour's direction was the massive increase in energy bills, and the general cost of living on top of that. Other things nudged the direction a bit, but nothing else really shifted the needle.
Hopefully they can start to see sense, because whilst Labour are turning out to be a spectacular disappointment, the thought of Reform or the Tories again is just horrific.
But hey, it's OK, 70% of people voted to keep FPTP two referendums ago, so we're all screwed.
The only thing that started heavily shifting polls in Labour's direction
The polls never shifted in Labour's direction, they got fewer votes in 2024 than they did in 2019.
What actually happened is that moderate Tory voters got fed up with the succession of useless Tory governments who abandoned moderate Conservative policies to keep plodding along in the Blairite centrist middle ground, constantly increasing taxes & spending, and doing SFA to actually address the problems, while being convinced that everyone would soon "see the light". Sunak's idiocy in calling an election when everyone told him he'd get absolutely stuffed is a case in point.
Labour lost some "red wall" types to Reform, the Tories lost half their votes (7m+) to Reform and the LDs, not necessarily because they wanted either of them (neither was ever going to get enough seats to form a government) but simply to give Sunak a kicking in the hope that someone better would replace him. Since Badenoch is largely invisible apart from a bit of sniping at PMQs there isn't much sign of that happening.
Rachel Reeves seems to think that she can tax her way into growth, which never works, she needs to cut spending and taxes before all the people who actually earn money for the country get up and leave.
But hey, it's OK, 70% of people voted to keep FPTP two referendums ago, so we're all screwed.
Interestingly, if the 2024 election had been run on PR with seats proportional to votes, Labour would only have had 219 (instead of 411), the Tories 154 (not 121), LDs 79 (not 72) and Reform 93 (instead of 5). I don't see any likely way to make a workable coalition with a majority out of that (maybe Lab+LD+Greens? can't see that lasting) so we'd be in the same position as France is today. Still screwed.
Did anyone verify that though before employing her? Damn. What we need is some sort of digital ID system that would enable one to look up an employee's right to work, qualifications, last employer, tax code, NI number, IQ, shoe size, who they met from Tinder last week...
A government mandated digital ID app on every phone, which has a microphone, video camera and GPS tracker.
Can track everybody all the time and record where they go, whom they meet and what they talk about. Tie that into their employment, healthcare data, bank accounts, card purchases, social media posts, internet sites visited and who you voted for. Every minute of your entire life being streamed into a government database. And all that information being sold and mined by AI bots. It's a dystopian nightmare. No wonder the government are so keen to rip up the greenbelt to build massive datacentres.
And it will do nothing to stop people doing casual work for cash in hand. I think one of the real purposes is targeted taxation. To figure out who in the working classes is managing to accumulate a bit of savings and figure out a way take it away from them.
We need to fight against this.
All those shouty capitals and exclamation marks - hmmm. Are you Donald Trump?
You've clearly not thought about what you posted. Another Trump indicator.
Removing the SIM or using VoIP will make no difference. Your Tonycard will include a QR code (or whatever). That's the thing that will be scanned by Starmer's Stasi and this interaction will be fed into the mother of all databases. Congratulations! You''ve just been tracked. Big Brother says have a nice day.
Going by the flags I see, half the people will have the flag tattooed upside down.
Yes, the people putting them up are so "patriotic" they don't even know how to fly the flag (and I'm constantly confused why most are flown at half mast).
Still, better than them flying the Georgia flag, because its the Ingerland flag x5
From what I read of the UK generally, understandable – the first signals distress and the second (national) mourning.
Given the Sun has long since set on the "Great" of Great Britain perhaps it ought not be flown at all.
Being symmetric the St Georges Cross probably typifies the English stiff upper lip – can't signify distress but good for a funeral.
The AU (and NZ) flags are easier to get right on the pole - hang with butcher's apron, top left.
¹ The mnemonic wide white top for the diagonal crosses adjacent the flag pole is fairly easy to recall.
@HorseflySteve
Opposing genocidal Israel divernment actions is not anti Semitic.
Just like people who do not like the actions of Trump USA government are not anti American.
Just like I'm non racist against black people for disliking David Lammy - I dislike him for his policies & comments - skin colour irrelevant (same as disliking Starmer does not mean I am racist against white people)
"Just like people who do not like the actions of Trump USA government are not anti American"
Even when they are saying America needs to be destroyed or are waving the flag of a foreign nation?
Unfortunately in the UK we have just witnessed the results of the establishment allowing, and even encouraging, open support for terrorist organisations. The protesters that take to the streets day after day are not 'opposing' a government, they are advocating for the removal of a sovereign nation from the map.
It is political control freakery, keeping an eye on all of us, all the time. Placing a burden on 65m people to handle a few thousand skint foreigners. Absolute farce.
We didn't need age verification either as we already had ISP blocks.
It is unlikely to happen anyway. Labour have zero chance of being in power after this term. Starmer is unlikely to be leader for much longer.
At worst they will waste a tonne of public money on this before Reform get in and cancel it.
This is without question the worst Labour government in history. Incompetent, shambolic bunch of fascists.
Even if they do force it through, it will get hacked, cloned, faked and lead to a huge rise in identity theft. The more you rely on an ID, the more trouble you are in when it gets hacked.
That's the sticking point. In order to give it the functionality desired, one would be required to share access to your digital ID, presumably locked by biometrics. Just flashing a phone screen in front of someone to show them your fizzog and a couple of green ticks is too easily faked with photoshop or something.
So the live look up of BOTH parties will be logged and recorded along with the response and other metadata like location, timestamps, networks used, device IDs etc all to be secured in a blockchain or something. A man-in-the-middle app might perhaps change the appearance of the response graphic, so the API for the app will be strictly locked if one exists at all (thank God for that consideration of expanded functionality versus ability to fake something)
So in order for it to add anything to the existing way of doing things, Alice would have to check Bob's details using Alice's trusted device by supplying a token that Bob has given her; Charlie at the government end would have to understand the tokens from both Alice and Bob in order to supply a response, logging the incoming and outgoing information forensically. And of course the app would embed some biometric data into the tokens no doubt, otherwise cousin Victor who resembles Bob an awful lot could just lend Bob their unlocked phone.
Now, given this wealth of information centralised, the authorities would no longer have to leave the office to grub around in the filing cabinet of a company to get that smudgy photocopy of someone's passport and work visa they got two years ago.
Next step, how to enforce, say, the limit of 20 hours a week on student work visas. Instead of an annual return of an employee's pay summary with NI and tax deductions etc, expect weekly or monthly submissions of exactly how many hours were worked.
Creep. The thin end of the wedge has already passed. All of this, of course WAS in the manifesto - that bit where they promised to cut red tape for business? The mandatory checks can now be done in seconds instead of a few weeks in the case of a DBS check. It's not what you thought of when you read that phrase, but who thought "simplifying the tax system" meant cutting the 90% rate and leaving the 20% and 40% to pick up the slack rather than the rules being written in a language not even tax specialists can understand?
And when it comes to tax of course, one obvious use of this is to provide a tax code to the employer to make sure the correct tax is paid... The icon for "domicile for tax purposes" is going to be *see-no-evil monkey* by the way.
There would have to be solid, set in stone, immutable laws in place to protect the public from abuse of an ID before it could even become close to being palatable.
And that'll never happen because the government wants to push ID's into more areas to make it easier to track people. So yes: ID for work (Like we don't have right to work checks already), but it'll move on to ID to vote (which we already have). Then ID to buy a car (again, ID checks already exist for this). Then ID to buy or rent a house (Yup: Already have this). ID to travel abroad (passport). This would just mean to normalises the use of this digital ID for 'simplicity' so we all accept having one. And then the hammer will drop and it'll be ID to travel on a train, or when buying certain things (if not all things). And it'll be mandated you carry it for when police arrest people at protests. Or when they get bored. Or to meet their quotas for the day. And then it'll get expanded further so your ID is checked by private companies before they do business with you, and they'll collect and use that ID, which will then get leaked and there'll be a thriving black market for these ID's as criminals can then use them for fraud and identity theft and... it'll be an utter disaster, a mess, a waste of time and resources... but that is no doubt their intention.
I'd rather be wrong about all that and it won't be so bad. I'm worried I will be but it'll be worse instead.
"Papieren, bitte."
Quickly followed by passing beneath the welcome sign: Arbeit macht frei.¹
"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate " should be writ large over the future we dooming ourselves to.
¹ "durch Krematorium Nummer drei." completed with gallows humour by the inmates.
Through my own stupidity with an improperly extinguished cigarette, last year I managed to set fire to the flat I own.
The buildings insurance put me up in temporary accomodation while my flat was being repaired.
Despite the insurance paying, the rental agreement had to be in my name.
My driving licence, and details of a mortgage I had been paying on the flat I had lived in for 32 years wasn't deemed sufficient to prove I ws entitled to rent a property in UK.
As all other forms of ID had been destroyed in the fire, I had to contact the records office where I was born an obtain a copy of my birth certificate to use with my driving licence.
"There would have to be solid, set in stone, immutable laws in place to protect the public from abuse of an ID before it could even become close to being palatable.
And that'll never happen"
Another reason why it won't happen. Somewhere along the line, either because it uses a US corporation's infrastructure or the contract's just handed to a US corporation in its entirety there'll be no way any such laws being enforceable because the USG will be able to ride roughshod over thm.
Why not just enforce the current requirements for employers, Deliveroo is just one example, they should be fined for each illegal using counterfeit accounts, as should those selling their accounts. This sounds like a set-up-to-fail scheme that will cost billions and when it collapses be used an excuse as to why the government can't deal with the migration crisis. Every job I have had has required a passport on day 1 to be scanned, HR is terrified if they get caught out, and in some cases they have personal liability, not just the business in question.
The governments in Europe REALLY want this mass migration by their continued actions. Roma people and people entering illegally from France are NOT asylum seekers, it's just the most convenient method to get permanent residency in the UK, a roof, allowance and ability to work cash in hand. Not to mention all the hotels that are getting money from taxpayers and are conveniently owned by government chums and PE firms.
Hmm, Considering some people have most of their lives on their smart phone, what would happen when it gets stolen ?
They've lost their ID as well as all the other stuff they've put on there.
Then you have the fun task of proving who you are without your primary form of ID !
Is there a special government department that comes up with these stupid ideas ?
Everything is getting hacked these days from Electoral Roles, Airport services , Large Companies who should know better down to kids Nurseries.
Given the govenment's track record of IT screw ups, it's a very expensive disaster waiting to happen.
Those who "specialise" in indentity theft will have a grand time.
"Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the UK," said prime minister Keir Starmer. "It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure. And it will also offer ordinary citizens countless benefits, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly – rather than hunting around for an old utility bill."
No thanks
The only way this works is to constantly validate everyone’s validity.
If I’m retired, what’s to stop me signing up for work at a bunch of places and sub my authorised work out to someone else for a fee, could be a nice supplement to my pension.
So many ways this nonsense can be exploited which shows the reasons given are mere excuses and not the true reason they want this.
Given all the lies since 1997 this is just the latest incarnation of governments trying to be authoritarian.
They work for us, we don’t work for them
They work for the people who pay them. Whilst on the face of it we pay them, actually they TAKE a wage, we do not choose to pay them. Their donors choose to pay them, so that's who they work for, because the donors can choose to not pay them.
The only power we have over politicians is to vote in superior alternatives when we are given the chance....
Indeed, plenty of rules to stop "illegals" working, but enforcement & investigations lacking*.
However some employees turn a blind eye or facilitate schemes e.g. a large base of staff as freelancers, who may only work occasionally - have a few legit worker details on the books & any illegals can claim to be one of those identities in a raid (hairdressers, nail bars etc. a classic for this).
In many cases where workers not really "on premises" (e.g. delivery people etc) then simpler as details of a "legitimate" UK resident used as a worker & then illegals do the work (deliveries etc.) in their place (typically the person who provides the legit id gets a cut)
* Similar for many things people / politicians get concerned about, a plethora of laws in the UK that cover "why oh why does this happen" moans, but lack of resources is the big issue (a classic many will be aware of is Trading Standards underfunded & understaffed so get periodic instances of dangerous products causing issues e.g. toys with forbidden materials, not meeting safety guidelines )
Well given somehow I have two government ID's, which one does nothing and the other I can't use because I only have half the information required to use it. But that's OK because I can revalidate it online. Oh wait, the system is so fucked it constantly falls over or just fails to work.
Still at least I can use one of my two NHS numbers to book an appointment online....ah shit no, still have to go in person to book in.
And then there's the elderly, you know, one of the biggest users of government services. Both my parents have smart phones. My dad constantly hangs up by accident when trying to answer the phone and my mum has finally got the hang of WhatsApp.
I teach older people to use IT. Many of those I teach do not know what a browser is, do not understand what app they are currently using ("I got a message from my phone") and are not clear how to download an app. Without a national scheme of training I can't see how this cohort will be able to access a digital ID.
There's no mandatory retirement age any more, indeed mostly illegal to exclude on age grounds, and being a pensioner does not stop the need to work, often part-time. (And nice not having to pay National Insurance.) Some old keyboard warriors would not trust our fat fingers to do anything important on a small phone with a sensitive touch-screen, but we increasingly need to hire in help, and becoming a legal employer is just too difficult and expensive (holiday and sick pay, pension, NI and PAYE monthly online).
The resultant database of everyone's details will of course be absolutely secure with strict access controls.
So no rogue plod could possibly misuse it to stalk someone.
And it will be completely impossible for hackers to break in and grab and/or corrupt the lot.
And no future government would ever under any circumstances extend and misuse it for political purposes or for authoritarian control.
Also, have you ever considered all the advantages of owning a really nice bridge?
From what articles i have read most illegal work is either cash in hand jobs where no one asks for any proof or someone who is legally allowed to work, uses their ID to get a job and then someone else actually goes to do it. Neither of which this digital ID will solve.
What is will do thought is enable the gov to mission creep this into something that can serve as age verification and to tie online accounts to a real person. So that next time there someone posts an offensive tweet the plod can sit at their desks and just pull up their digital ID and send 6 officer to go and arrest them. Yay! crime is down look at all these nasty criminals we have arrested.
The idiocy, ignorance and hypocrisy is beyond parody. An HR lawyer implements the ultimate violation of Human Rights by demanding workers have 'Digital ID, 'to stop the boats'. All that's needed to stop the boats is for the French to do what the Belgians do, stop the boats on the beach.
No amount of Digital Anything will 'stop the boats', and to think so will implies belief in the Emperor's New Clothes.
Implementing Digital ID will drive even more migrants into 'Modern Slavery', when they actually need to go back from whence they came, France, who should then ship them back.
But that won't happen because the French are still in Revolutionary mode, and our courts are limp wristed, hamstrung by judges implementing ECHR rules allowing felons, thieves and murderers to stay even though they violate our laws, supported by Human Rights lawyers doing the work pro bono to keep them here, commit serious crime? you are gone.
BTW, legitimate refugees with legitimate reasons to request asylum should be welcomed properly, but we can't, because the authorities are overrun with people with no right nor reason to stay, the 'Indefinite Leave to Stay' should be abolished for anybody not being a legitimate refugee.
If you rock up without identify papers, you go back, unless you are a legitimate refugee. If you don't like the digs you are offered, you are free to leave.
I’ve heard a number of Labour ministers state that digital id will deter migrants from coming to the uk
https://news.sky.com/story/digital-id-cards-would-help-to-deter-migrants-from-heading-to-uk-harriet-harman-says-13395054#:~:text=Digital%20ID%20cards%20would%20help%20to%20deter%20migrants%20from%20heading%20to%20UK%2C%20Harriet%20Harman%20says
Can anyone explain how it’ll deter migrants illegally entering the uk,
Bonus question, if they are so bad they act as a deterrent, why do normal law abiding citizens need or want them?
Surely the better way is to mandate illegal migrants have digital id & everyone else uses what we’ve already got.
Make it make sense!
As far as understand it, the idea is to restrict access to employment by enforcing that potential employers can quickly verify someones right to work via their digital ID. the suggestion is that by making harder to get a job, economic migrants are discouraged from attempting to enter. There has been some suggestions that one of the resaons teh UK is considered an attractive destination is that we don't have such a system unlike a lot of Europe meaning people can enter the ecomomy with little effort and checks
Some have said that this will not stop the black economy, and while that is true, it will restrict access to other jobs, whose checks currently rely easily clonable info such as NI numbers etc
Personaly I am pretty relaxed about it. Yes there are risks such as cyber attacks, but the same could be said of all the other Government electronic info out there on me. A one stop shop for services such as NHS, driving Licence would be better than the currebt piecemeal system we have, and yes not everyone has access to digital, and while there needs to be systems in place to cater for those, the truth is we rely on digital services daily, but getting access to them relies on a plethora of paper documents that haven't changed much since victorian times.
People employing those who don't have the right to work here are already failing to do the checks that are already there and already mandatory. This will do nothing to change that. Gang masters, modern slavers, and people smugglers already aren't doing those checks, and won't be doing these ones either.
"Personaly I am pretty relaxed about it. Yes there are risks such as cyber attacks, but the same could be said of all the other Government electronic info out there on me. A one stop shop for services such as NHS, driving Licence would be better than the currebt piecemeal system"
You seem to be remarkably ignorant of a basic security principle: compartmentalisation.
If the IT systems at the DVLA fail, it doesn't bugger up your hospital appointment or the passport checks at the border. That would happen (and worse) if there was a one stop shop.
Now consider the problems when there's a data leak or that one stop shop's database is compromised. How do you recover from that? Giving everyone new biometrics will be a bit of a challenge. Rebooting the whole country - at the same time FFS!! - won't be simple either.
Does anyone believe that Android & iOS will NOT be building this into the core OS, it's not a difficult addition to the existing face unlock feature.
Imagine not being able to set up your new phone without creating an ID grade selfie for the (soon to be) mandated ID app.
'There is no way whatsoever that I am prepared to install any government mandated software on my phone'
You already have to if you own a business. It's called Gov.UK onelogin and all dealings with HMRC and Companies House require it's use. Next will be anyone who has to do a self assessment.
"[the govt] said it will ensure the scheme works for people who cannot use a smartphone."
Obviously you will be microchipped in the same way a veterinarian does cats and dogs.
Just make sure when you roll up at the vet's that it's only microchipping you are in for – unless you wish to sing soprano or want some something·affirming procedure.
Like the smartmeters, track and trace and every other piece of digital crap they force on us.
Governments typically ask a lot of questions, ignore the answers, and do what they want.
What it will mean is a huge rise in distraction burglaries (Hello Madam, I'm from the government. As you are old/vulnerable I'm here to assist you with your digital ID') and phishing.
> It said it will ensure the scheme works for people who cannot use a smartphone, with a public consultation engaging with digitally excluded, homeless, and older people."
I fit into none of those categories. I am neither digitally excluded (I am very digital literate and inclusive!) nor homeless nor old (well not very old) and I certainly can use a smartphone.
However, I willingly chose not to use a smartphone by the action of not owning one.
What now?
"...but I can see it mandated for a citizen to be allowed to vote"
Well, we already allow non-citizens to vote. Requiring it for citizens to be allowed to vote will probably be tied in with only allowing them to vote for the government-mandated candidate.
"Let's hope the Labour Party gets its house in order before the next election, or we're really fucked."
Erm, how will this shower of piss get their house in order? When Simon Case wrote “I’ve never seen a bunch of people less well-equipped to run a country,” he was speaking of the Tories, but it clearly still applies to the parliamentary Labour party. There's not a single gleam of intelligent thought amongst the entire cabinet or their backbenchers, and it seems that those backbenchers want Andy Burnham to come and save them, with a spend-and-spend agenda that will result in the sort of markets meltdown triggered by the equally stupid Liz Truss.
Am I missing some Labour statesman hiding in the wings?
Government spending is what creates a successful economy - new money cannot be created any other way.
Taxation destroys money, hence its use to control inflation. Taxes are not used to pay for anything.
The national 'debt' measures the split of government-created money between the public and private sectors.
"Austerity" is a way of shrinking the national economy; this can make it easier to "rebalance" the distribution of wealth.
Government is not a form of business/corporation/household ; government economics are not business/corporation/household economics.
From the moment this government adopted that flawed AI strategy document wholesale it has been apparent the Blair-era apparatchiks have control, hence the reappearance of the ID card and a series of other inexplicably inept proposals and decisions.
Those of you that wonder why we have a second house that is full of people who weren't voted in are about to find out why it's there.
The Introduction of Digital ID for all adults was not in the Labour party manifesto at the last general election so the government has no mandate for it. This means that the law introducing it must be passed by the House of Lords.
It will almost certainly be rejected by them & the only way the government will get it passed will be to include it in the manifesto at the next general election & win.
Those of you that wonder why we have a second house that is full of people who weren't voted in are about to find out why it's there.
it shouldn't work but a load of rich people who can think on a longer cycle than the next election really does work
A few times they've been offered bribes and walked away laughing and telling everyone all about it because how can you bribe a rich guy with a perma-job. Wasn't there a big event around the EU ministers taking huge bribes from big tobacco or something and our guy just going right to the papers telling everyone all about it because he was worth many times more than they were offering
A super-rich toff doesn't make the case for the House of Lords. It's still an unelected plaything for the government of the day.
Although this toff may well have said he couldn't be bought, there are plenty of others in the House of Lords who can and have been bought: Peter Mandelson and Michelle Mone for starters.
"the only way the government will get it passed will be to include it in the manifesto at the next general election & win."
In which case they'd have failed the target of having it up and running (an ambitious target to say the least) by the end of the current parliament.
" This means that the law introducing it must be passed by the House of Lords. It will almost certainly be rejected by them"
Whilst general practice is to start non-manifesto bills in the Lords, that doesn't stop the Commons passing the bill. Without the Lords assent it can't immediately go for Royal Assent, but it can do so after a year. The idea that if the Lords block it then that prevents the bill full stop is incorrect, and that is enshrined in the Parliament Act.
It will almost certainly be rejected by them & the only way the government will get it passed will be to include it in the manifesto at the next general election & win.
this is wishful thinking
don't be surprised when teh house of lords rushes this through.
What makes you think they they would reject this?
This means that the law introducing it must be passed by the House of Lords.
It will almost certainly be rejected by them
FFS! Are you really that gullible?
The HoL voted for ID cards the last time His Tonyness decided we had to have them. They'll happily do his bidding this time around too.
Even if there was no majority in the HoL for this bullshit, that wanker Starmer will stuff the HoL with enough of his cronies and toadies to make sure there was a majority for his PoV. Just like the Orange Manbaby did to the US Supreme Court.
And in the unlikely event the HoL did vote no, the son-of-a-toolkmaker can use the Parliament Act to force call me Tony's legislation through.
"The Introduction of Digital ID for all adults was not in the Labour party manifesto at the last general election so the government has no mandate for it. This means that the law introducing it must be passed by the House of Lords.”
Actually that’s just a convention. Every Bill has to be approved by the Lords, it’s just understood that the Lords won’t oppose any manifesto commitments but will just pass it regardless, b ut there is no Law requiring this. Clashes between the Commons and the Lords tend not to end favourably for the latter!
"It will almost certainly be rejected by them & the only way the government will get it passed will be to include it in the manifesto at the next general election & win."
Or force it into Law regardless of the Lords by involving the Parliament Act, at best delayed by a year.
"This is not like an ID card where you would be asked to show it as you are moving around."
While I can understand the fear of creep, I'd just like to point out my experience here in France with a UK passport and French (Brexit) residency permit that I'm required to carry at all times. In the past five years, I've been stopped by the police four times. Two of them were random checks on cars (does it have an MOT, is it insured, etc) and they only looked at my ID to confirm that I was me. The other two were during Covid and they were checking my address (because I live on a regional border) to ensure that I wasn't out unnecessarily. But I had my pieces of paper and that was that. The final two outfits that looked at my ID were the bank (to show I had the right to be here, hence a bank account) and my employer (to show I had the right to work - post Brexit permits do not allow that). Oh, and when I bought a car the guy took a photo of it for sorting out the financing. Again, proof for a bank. I have voluntarily offered it myself, like at the opthalmologist, because it's quicker than trying to spell my address, they can just read it.
I don't see anything particularly onerous about the ID card. I have the right to be here, this thing proves I have the right to be here, and once in a very blue moon somebody comes along and asks. I hand over, they look, and job done we both go on our ways...
The thing that would worry me is not the ID, it's a good idea for trying to curb the number of people who shouldn't be here. No, that it is digital and on a phone. Massive red flags.
By contrast, the French one is a physical card. Biometrics, smart chip, government database, etc etc, but it doesn't track your every movement.
What you have, is a card that proves your identity, but which isn't used to access services, so can't be used (easily) to track your every move.
What this is, is a card that will be a requirement to access vital services (such as employment), so can and will be used to track you; if not by this government, than by future authoritarians. There are always more authoritarians waiting in the wings.
What this also is, is a central store of your personal information, something which is a very valuable target to hackers; not because it's your personal information, but because it is everybody's personal information. What's even worse is that it will a government IT system that is put out to public tender, so will be the usual job of giving it to the lowest bidder, who then runs up the bill to five or six times the original budget before delivering a bodged and unworkable system, if anything at all. Security for your data within this, if it exists at all, will be a tacked-on afterthought. Good luck getting new biometrics when the details of your fingerprints and high-resolution images for facial recognition get stolen.
French ID cards, as far as I am aware, don't do anything like that, and if the French had even half an inkling that their government was even thinking of such a thing, the protests would make the gilets jaunes look like a school outing. We would probably be able to smell the smoke from Dover.
The internet is rapidly evolving back into what it was once called—a digital superhighway. Just like on physical roads where you must show ID when requested, I foresee a future where accessing the web will require a verified digital identity. Every action—browsing, posting, downloading—could be tied to your personal ID and IP address. Imagine downloading a film today, and five years from now, receiving a legal notice demanding payment for copyright infringement committed years earlier. The era of anonymous surfing may be coming to an end
I think we're already deep into surveillance state territory, with cameras everywhere and police / government trawling through social media posts. Your phone already logs all your movements without Bill Gates having to put a chip in your COVID jab. I can't see having a single id number is going to make much difference, even if other things we're already doing might be linked to it in the future.
Most of us are already using various Gov apps & websites using email address for the Gov.uk app, a gateway id for tax info and an NHS number. The DBA in me is asking why I have at least three primary ids?
You really, honestly think that a single government ID will supplant any of the many other government identifiers?
And if you reckon yes, how much will it cost to recode every single national and local government system to accept the new ID format and number, and indeed the entirety of the NHS' fragmented IT? Not to mention perhaps half of all corporate ERP systems, and those of local government.
All these systems get replaced every few years by the next over due over budget system, so ids can easily be changed between versions. In fact, if the government databases are being coordinated properly, then all these ids would be secondary keys and it comes down to whether we get told what our primary key actually is.
"All these systems get replaced every few years by the next over due over budget system"
Tell me honestly that you are unaware how old/how long some of the current Government/official systems have been running without being replaced (and keep a straight face whilst doing so).
To help correct you misconceptions, I will point at some of the NHS IT systems to start you off.
..@AC
You do realise you can still get dumb phones, so no GPS tracking (obviously if you turn them on you will connect to a cell tower then that can be tracked).
Fine for "emergency use".
But often there is no need to have a mobile phone with you.
..Though I am of an older generation where mobile phones were definitely not a thing as kids growing up (indeed, lots of households lacked a landline) so never grew up with the "always connected" scenario
Idea
Where do I sign up? (if I can get my arms out of this strait jacket)
No photo driving licence, my passport is way out of date, and my phone is ages old (still works though so I see no point in the latest shiny shiny) so why exactly do I need a 'digital ID' to work when I'm semi retired anyway or even fully retired in a few years time.
And if the idea is to verify people in work, perhaps a better idea would be banning gig work(I'm looking at you amazon, deliveroo etc etc etc), along with hefty fines for companies employing people who shouldn't be working here(throwing the hiring managers in jail should concentrate minds too)
And finally as the most important point in regards to illegally coming here..... France has ID cards...... does'nt seem to stop the people illegally in France does it?
" France has ID cards...... does'nt seem to stop the people illegally in France does it?"
You miss the point. Tonycards aren't about stopping illegal immigrants or preventing them from getting jobs, no matter what Starmer's lying shits claim.
This time round, the Liebour Party is starting from that bogus and hopefully not so controversial point. You don't have to carry your Tonycard. It'll only be needed when you start a new job. Nobody can make you show it. Blah, blah, blah... But the trajectory remains the same as last time Tonycards were suggested: unavoidable ubiquitous and intrusive state surveillance of everyone where nobody can do anything without first handing over their ID card. The only difference is the Liebour party were more upfront about their intentions that time than they are today.
"Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the UK Reform to take advantage of," said prime minister Keir Starmer. "It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country actually prove who you are, making our borders more secure buddies in the consulting industry so much richer. And it will also offer ordinary citizens countless benefits headaches, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly not being able to prove your identity if someone steals your phone – rather than hunting around for an old utility bill actually being useful and thought through rather than a knee-jerk reaction."
FTFY.
This is going to be badly designed, done on the cheap but many times over budget by a US contractor.
This will mean things like horribly hackable, unreliable and heavily monitored by US corporations like, Microsoft, Apple, Oracle and various criminals like the mafia, CIA, NSA etc and will be under the guidance from the US Republican party.
It will not accept that I am known by my second name and will keep addressing me as my late father.
This will do nothing to address the issues that are uppermost in people's concerns, whether you agree with them or not.
It will not stop the boats. There will be nobody standing on the beaches and demanding to see people's ID and turning them back.
It has been stated that it will not be required to receive benefits.
It has been stated that it will not be required to access NHS services.
It has been stated that it will not be required to access government services.
All in all, a complete shitshow.
It has been stated it will "stop people searching for jobs". How is it going to stop somebody typing "Indeed Jobs" into a web browser?
It has been stated that it will not be required to receive benefits, but it has been said it will be required to seek work. So....... will it be compulsary demanded by the Job Centre or not?
Even getting down the the nitty gritty, the claim it will "stop people without permission to work being employed". Make it illegal for somebody who is breaking the law to break the law....? Yeah, great thinking.
"I was all up for breaking the law and entering the country without permission, but the threat that breaking the law and working without government permission would be illegal means it's not worth it" said nobody ever.
2001-2003: Home Office decides to introduce entitlement cards/ID cards and begins consultations from scratch as though they have no experience of the subject. 2010, the National Identity Service fails.
2010-2011: the Government Digital Service decides to introduce an identity verification system and begins consultations from scratch as though they have no experience of the subject. 2018-2021, GOV.UK Verify fails.
2021: the Government Digital Service decides to introduce an identity verification system and begins consultations from scratch as though they have no experience of the subject. 2025, GOV.UK One Login fails.
2025: No.10 decides to introduce an identity verification system and begins consultations from scratch as though they have no experience of the subject. 2029 BritCard fails.
Goldfish are said to have poor memories. "Oh look", they say, as they swim round the bowl again, "a castle. Never seen that before". Will Whitehall ever learn?
We all wish they would. It would save us from repeating ourselves. Repeating ourselves is boring.
This is my fourth time. And SA Mathieson's, too, https://samathieson.com/sa-mathieson/id-cards-david-blunketts-image-problem-with-biometrics/
So I assume it will be machine readable by RFID like a digital credit card, but it will also need to be eye readable if you want to use it as an proof of age say if you are buying booze in the offlicence. So within a couple of hours after seeing what the screen looks like there will be spoof apps that display any info you want.
Back when I was still contracting I did so via my own limited company (I was the sole Director and also was an employee of said company).
It sounds like this Digital ID crap means if I started contracting again (outside IR35) that I (as Director) would need to demand that I (as potential employee) produce a Digital ID to myself to prove to myself that I'm entitled to work in the UK.
Every branch of government.
HMRC, DWP, DSS and PC Plod will send the boys round because you haven't used the employer edition Crapita-supplied Tonycard scanner. Then they'll break down your front door and take you away because there's no entry on the database to prove you've shown your Tonycard to anyone => you're obviously up to something subversive.
... are likely metaphoricaly polishing their sabers.
Outside of maybe the NHS this would probably be the biggest IT project in UK history.
And the UK government, of course, has an absolutely stellar record of successfuly delivering IT projects at scale!
El Reg should start a pool on how long, from implementation, it takes to be hacked or go titsup.
I'll punt in at 9mths.
Well there’s a lot of noise on this one, to be expected. Calm down dears!
Meanwhile there already is one. It’s called the Post Office Easy ID app, endorsed by the National Police Chief’s Council and the Security Industry Association. It ingests your passport, driving license and a few other bits, and you get to show what it displays depending on what you’re doing. Buying age restricted goods? Show your age range, along with photo I’d and a nice hologram. Your photo is biometrically checked against your passport, so no faking that.. Need actual date of birth? Done. I’ve asked them to add address to the display (it’s on your driving license duh) so I can pick up parcels from collection points, which was what prompted me to get it in the first place,
Because I don’t want to have to carry those documents with me just to pick up something I might get challenged on.
Those working illegally in the UK will be working for businesses that do not conduct thorough checks.
The claim that the issuance of Digital ID and the requirement of the ID for employment is undermined by the lack of resources available to check businesses disregarding current laws and by the reticence of the Prosecution Service to pursue convictions.
This is of course unimportant detail. Starmercards aren't about employment checks. Though that's the lie Starmer's toadies want us to believe. As you point out, nobody's going to crack down on illegal employment. The intent is to use Starmercards for everything. Forcing everyone to have one but only show them when someone gets a new job is just the first step towards that goal. Once we start down that slippery slope, it'll be impossible to get off it.
At least until Labour discovers that Tory and Reform voters are the ones who refuse to have Digital ID. Then it will become mandatory.
It'll be fine. Digital IDiocy is all about making the things you used to do without one even more convenient. Like voting! You already need to show ID, what will be more convenient? You already take your smart phone with you to the polling station.. so voting will be easier! Unless your phone has been lost, stolen, broken..
I've also asked if the DigIDiot card will work on my jailbroken phone, suspecting I'll already know the answer..
"DigitalID will NOT be required for voting in elections, merely being presented as an option."
That's what these lying arseholes might be saying today. But tomorrow...
The end goal is to make Tonycards mandatory for everything. If it wasn't, why would Starmer and his Stasi wannabes bother to introduce them?
To renew my expired passport.
Scouser, white, born in Wallasey by the Mersey.
Given I'm 64, IT guy, unemployed, and can manage pretty well with UC and food banks - *please* make it harder for me get a job.
Simplify my life.
I am aware that l a torrent of downvotes are probably going to hit me in a few minutes.
Hmm.. the authors make for interesting research.
Kirsty Innes - Tony Blair Institute for Global Change
Morgan Wild - Never had a proper job outside academia and politics
Laurel Boxall - Only 2 jobs outside academia and politics totalling 16 months and the listed skills included 'storytelling'.
"A universal digital ID - the BritCard - will not be a silver bullet to the problem of illegal migration. This paper does not pretend it is."
OK, so what ARE we being sold??
If you want to stop illegals from being in your nation, you pass laws to arrest, try and convict those that provide them with housing, employment and aid. Try and convict a few publicly, let a few lamdlords have their rental units confiscated, and an illegal wouldn't be able to get so much as a sandwich in your nation. Boom, illegal problem is solved.
I was dismayed by Labour Together's PDF report here:
https://www.labourtogether.uk/all-reports/britcard
because it said the scheme should "learn the lessons from other successful rapid tech delivery projects such as the ... EU Settled Status Scheme".
The unhappily named "settled status" scheme is "successful"? No, I am sorry to tell you, there is no physical card, it only works with a smartphone, it is all online only, it isn't working. Too often it is off-line or broken in some other way, making EU citizens with the right to be in the UK unable to prove their rights.
It has had the unbelievable problem of "data entanglement". Some people have found someone else's photo or other details on their record. After anxious phone calls trying to get it corrected, some people found it happened "more than once".
How on earth has a problem involving half-overwriting someone's record with another record been possible?? It suggests to me that at some point, Home Office staff have been copying and pasting data using Excel spreadsheets and slipping parts of rows of data by mis-clicking with a mouse.
The EU citizens' rights group the3million.org.uk has been trying to get attention to these problems. A better idea is a physical card that can be verified online.
Too often the debate about migration ignores the voices of the people who are being talked about.
The3million says, "The government is ignoring current mandatory right to work checks already exist, as well as countless punitive measures designed to make life unbearable for undocumented people. Introducing a new way of checking will not change the fact that black market employers don’t check...
"And the reality is these measures don’t work. They only create fear in people who have already been made vulnerable, driving them even further into exploitation. We cannot in good conscience advocate for yet another measure of mandatory surveillance which does not consider the wishes and needs of the British public, and which invades the privacy of British citizens. We - ten million migrants who have made the UK our home - have no choice but to have our own data processed by the Home Office - and through this experience, we’ve seen how problematic this is".
Read what the3million has to say for yourself:
https://the3million.org.uk/why-mandatory-digital-ids-are-not-answer
And the language! The International Rescue Committee says, "Yet, when they finally arrive, refugees often find themselves caught in a war of words, with dehumanising terms like 'illegal immigrants' or 'illegal migrants' used in politics and media".
Unfortunately the words "illegal migrants" appear 5 times in Labour Together's PDF report and "illegal migration" appears 15 times. The word that ought to be used, "irregular" appears once. The IRC says, "Instead, using the term 'irregular migration' focuses on the structures that force people to take irregular routes, rather than labelling the individual".
https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-we-dont-use-term-illegal-migration-when-discussing-channel-crossings
I feel what this debate really needs is a big dose of poetry and other writing to give everyone more empathy on what it means to move to another country, for love, for an adventure, for a better life, or because "home became the mouth of a shark". Let's hear more from the people who have lived the experience? "Home can become somewhere other than where you were born".
Here's two for a start. Would you be willing to have a look?
https://togetherintheuk.co.uk/hear-our-stories-an-anthology-of-writings-on-migration-2023/
https://palewellpress.co.uk/bookstore/human-rights/smuj/
I have already got a digital status now because of being on Companies House as a director. I felt I ought to use the Anonymous Coward option because if I put my real name here then you could find me on Companies House and then get my home address. To "verify my identity" as a director for the first time was like, an interesting thing. It worked using my Android Nokia G20. First I had to download an app. It wanted a photo of the front of my driving licence, then a photo of the back of my driving licence, then I had to hold the phone up in front of me and it showed a pattern of different colours on the screen to illuminate my face.
Afterwards it felt a bit odd knowing that Companies House has now got a record of me in electronic form in this way. I am not against it as such, but I have to trust that they are going to look after it. It's optional right now. Apparently it's going to become compulsory for directors on the 18th of November 2025.
Finally, a related point is the registration of home addresses. In Austria, for example, "You have to register at your new address three days after moving into your new flat or house at the latest". In The In Limbo Project's book of testimonies, "In Limbo", a citizen of another EU country wrote that the UK was a strange EU country. Not in the Euro or Schengen, but still a fellow EU country. The writer said that it felt peculiar being in the UK with no registration requirement because "it made me feel unsafe. No-one would know where I was".
Is it time for the UK to expect everyone to register their address soon after they move house, in the same way as is normal in Luxembourg?
The TV serial '1990' staring Edward Woodward. (broadcast in 1977).
{Spoiler}
S1/E8, Non -citizen.
The state's revenge on the lead character for being troublesome is to strip him of ID, Union Card and de-bank him - can't work, can't access state services, can't access money - loses home, etc. How to kill someone without having to actual kill them.
And as noted, that was broadcast in the late 1970's.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
