Digital ID is now less about illegal working, more about rummaging through drawers

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has relaunched his digital ID scheme as something that will make people's lives easier, less than four weeks after announcing it as a measure to tackle illegal working. Digital ID will be compulsory for anyone taking a new job after the scheme goes live by the end of this parliamentary session, …

[Anonymous Coward]

You know it's bad...

when even Palantir won't touch it.

[MonkeyJuice]

Re: You know it's bad...

To be fair, the head of Palantir's UK operations pointed out you don't need an id card. You just create a database of NHS no, NI no, etc mapping to some unique key and be done with it. Palantir already have Gotham used by the Met and now presumably MoD, and all the NHS data since Covid. Their spook stack does not require id cards, that's kind of the point.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: You know it's bad...

The purpose of Digital ID is ability to track your movements and correlate them with other people, listening what you say, picking up keywords etc and then limiting what you can or cannot do. People are conditioned to swipe e.g Club Card during shopping, so another swipe with Digital ID could be required and your whole basket will be sent to database. Do you buy too much sweets? NHS surcharge for you... and so on. Possibilities are endless for anyone getting off on controlling people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: You know it's bad...

"listening what you say, picking up keywords etc"

Personally I am absolutely against Digital ID but the above is just complete paranoia!

"People are conditioned to swipe e.g Club Card during shopping, so another swipe with Digital ID could be required and your whole basket will be sent to database."

Why would a swipe of Digital ID be required to implement this? Club Cards are already registered to a particular person.

Also individuals are not required to have Club Cards etc. Some of us do not trade personal information for shopping discounts.

[Handlebars]

Re: You know it's bad...

I agree with most of this but it really is easy to make up an identity to get a clubcard.

[Handlebars]

Re: You know it's bad...

You would be surprised how much NHS data they don't have. But that's only because other big tech firms have it instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Just asking

>>> rummaging through drawers

Are those English ot American "drawers"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Just asking

In the English context they would be unmentionable(s). The BBC's infamous 1949 Green Book famously specifically banned suggestive references to Ladies’ underwear, e.g. winter draws on...

[WolfFan]

Re: Just asking

Both.

[A_O_Rourke]

Makes me wonder

If it's not needed for anything except work why they are touting early trials to Veterans and promising all manner of benefits "About 1.8 million veterans are eligible for the card which helps proves their status to access services and discounts."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj3zmjrzegjo

You can imagine the comments sections in the Facebook groups ;-)

[MatthewSt]

Re: Makes me wonder

Probably because they're a market that is already used to Id cards, having needed them for their day to day work. A significant number of veterans (40% of 2.4 million according to a 2020 report) are under 65, so it's more than reasonable that they're going to be able to use it for work.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Makes me wonder

As a former member of what the Cosuins like to call the Military and a member of a Ex-Forces forum I can safely say that this has gone down like a poo sandwich. I'm sure it has nothing to do with keeping track of the group of people who are trained and experienced in weapons usage. Anonymous for obvious reasons

[MatthewSt]

Re: Makes me wonder

Serious question here, but why does an Id card do that better than your National Insurance number, passport, driving licence, existing veterans card?

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Makes me wonder

Passport can be tossed in a drawer and it doesn't know where you are or can't listen to what you say.

[Glady's Back]

Re: Makes me wonder

...it doesn't know where you are or can't listen to what you say.

Isn't that what they want you to think?

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: Makes me wonder

As I mentioned in a post for an earlier article on the topic, if ever I need to get one, I'll be registering the digital ID on a cheap second hand smartphone with a pay as you go sim. In between the need to present the digital ID, the phone will be turned off and tossed into a drawer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: the phone will be turned off and tossed into a drawer.

Better make sure it's a locked drawer, and maybe check at some suitable frequency that it has stayed there. Because according to the Government, that phone is you, and so you are only you if you are holding the phone; ... and so would anyone else. :-)

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Makes me wonder

I think in the even of uprising against fascist government, they would want to know where each veteran is to contain the "problem" as quickly as possible.

That's why veterans are the priority.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Makes me wonder

If it's not needed for anything except work why they are touting early trials to Veterans and promising all manner of benefits

Because they're lying tossers.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: Makes me wonder

promising all manner of benefits

Maybe allow these "digitally verified"* citizens to sign out assorted crown jewels from the Tower for occasions such as weddings?

* One presumes the digital verification does not involve the use of a gloved finger by a HMG Citizenship Inspector

[UnknownUnknown]

Re: Makes me wonder

So what do you do if you don’t have/want a phone ?

[J.G.Harston]

I've already got a digital ID. It's called a passport. Y'know that little circle-square symbol thingy. You wave it over a scanner and it talks to it. And 86% of the population have one.

[Andy The Hat]

But that doesn't get used enough to harvest lots of loverly jubbly data.

The first thing you'll notice on the yet-another-new-government-portal website will be the scream of 184 "absolutely essential" cookies being dumped onto your machine followed by the declaration that your data *will* be shared with "trusted third parties".

[Tron]

Let's rebrand Starmer...

...as a backbencher.

I'm surprised he found a bank branch that was still open.

Surveillance tech is surveillance tech. The people that monitor it, function above the law, so they will not be bothered by any restrictions. That is why it is always better to not have it, than to have it with any restrictions or (stupid term alert), 'guardrails'.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Let's rebrand Starmer...

"I'm surprised he found a bank branch that was still open."

Perhaps that's why he had to go all the way to Brighton?

Or maybe he was just visiting Big Ange and popped into the bank on the way past?

[Blue Shirt Guy]

Re: Let's rebrand Starmer...

He was probably visiting Angela Rayner's bank. :-)

[James O'Shea]

Re: Let's rebrand Starmer...

You are far too kind. He should be rebranded as a shepherd, and exported o New Zealand as being surplus to requirements in the UK. I don't have anything against Kiwis, but they are about as far away from the UK as you can get without leaving the planet. If/when Herr Muskrat gets his Mars thingy working, he can be exported to Mars.

[Christoph]

Re: Let's rebrand Starmer...

he claimed customers were "really excited about it,"

Citizen #666 hasn't quite gone full Trump yet then. They weren't calling him 'sir' with tears in their eyes.

[Rich 2]

It’s about tax

Blunket tried this way back and (thankfully) got nowhere with it

As far as the government is concerned, it’s main purpose is to keep tabs on everyone for tax and state benefit purposes. It has always been about this - nothing else. Everything else is a “nice to have” (from a govt perspective) and it’s certainly not for our benefit

As has been pointed out many times, everyone has (probably multiple) forms of govt issued id - birth certificate, passport. Driving licence being the most obvious. This new farce has NOTHING to do with proving identity

[elsergiovolador]

Re: It’s about tax

and where the tax go? To multinational tax-shy corporations always winning government contracts.

[J.G.Harston]

Re: It’s about tax

birth certificate, passport. Driving licence

And even with those, the government screws up. I've been trying to help my neighbour set up an HMRC login so she can check her NI payments. To verify her identity she needs to scan her passport. But her passport is in her married name, and her HMRC records are in "a different" name. Which they won't tell her. So, she can't verify her identity because "The information you gave does not match our records". To change her HMRC records she needs to log on via Government Gateway. To log on to Government Gateway she needs a valid login. To validate her login she needs to use her passport. To use her passport her HMRC records needs to have a matching name. To change her HMRC records to match her passport she needs to log on via Government Gateway. To log on to Government Gateway she needs a valid login........

We've been fighting through this for four weeks now. Three weeks ago we managed to get through to a human on the telephone and they took her details and said they'd updated her records. That was three weeks ago and we're still going around in circles.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It’s about tax

@J.G.Harston

If it helps any I successfully rang HMRC few months ago and asked them to send me my NI contributions record, and they did, 3 weeks later as promised.

That said, my contributions record wasn't in a diff name. All I gave them was name, addr, dob, ni "number".

I rang rather than go the online route because the online route requires registering and that requires giving them a photo I won't do that.

[bernmeister]

Re: It’s about tax

I needed to replace a driving licence online. The multiple "prove your ID" loops were endless. I contacted GOV.UK One describing the problem and was told there was insufficient information held to confirm my ID. I have held many UK passports. Five in row. I have current bank accounts dating back decades but the explanation was that the ID verification was done by a third party who did not have enough data. I was eventually given a link to the old DVLA online lycence form, that worked OK. I have a very bad feeling about these new online services.

[tstaddon]

Re: It’s about tax

This is a familiar story, and it is one of the reasons why THIS THING has been in the works for years.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/uk-digital-identity-and-attributes-trust-framework

If every different government agency is creating its own silo of data about your identity, and they're all doing it with zero consideration for consistency or interoperability, the end result is the situation you're talking about.

There are only two ways to fix that - either you have one centralised monolithic system that acts as the "single source of truth" (and nobody wants that - it's the Blair vision of a "national identity register") OR you have an interoperability standard and enforce a bit of consistency.

The currently proposed digital ID solution is the latter, not the former.

[Caver_Dave]

How often do we change jobs?

I am willing to rummage around once every 15-20 years rather than this.

[Admiral Grace Hopper]

That might depend on how often your employer makes you redundant, or makes a change to your T&Cs so fuckwitted that you walk out the door.

[elsergiovolador]

In the age of AI agents you will be able to spin an agent that will keep you in the best job available at the time. You just need to put your Digital ID on the blockchain and just watch your employer and virtual environment change few times a day.

[Richard 12]

It'll be renting too

Landlords in England have to do significant "right-to-rent" checks, and risk really hefty fines if they allow an "undesirable" to rent a home.

So no matter what the law says, it will also be effectively impossible to rent anywhere unless you have one.

https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-rent

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: It'll be renting too

There's also a legal requirement for employers to check an applicants "right to work" too, so I'm not sure why a new digital ID will help. Employers who are not following the law now will continue to not follow any new laws over digital ID.

[J.G.Harston]

I work in IT. I change jobs about twice a year on average. That's just how the modern employment market works.

[David Hicklin]

From leaving school to retiring I changed job....<thinks for a moment >.... 3 times [11 years, 9 months, 14 Years and finally 24 years]. SWMBO on the other hand got into double figures.

I suspect that these days that number for most people could well be on the rise.

[original_rwg]

...'he claimed customers were "really excited about it," '

Definition of 'excited' is required....

[Anonymous Coward]

customers were "really excited about it"

I imagine "excited" in the same vein as the rowdy rustics armed with various lethal farm implements, assembled outside the castle gates.

[Anonymous Coward]

People referred to in press releases like this are always "excited". Perahps nearly as "excited" as the company executives quoted in press releases, who seem to go around in a permanent state of excitement that their company has contracted another company to clean the bogs (or whatever the contract which the press release is about happens to be)...

[short a sandwich]

That's a marketing "exciting".

"It will not, however, be used for surveillance or required for access to other services." Chinny reckon, Sir Starmer.

[MonkeyJuice]

And what are the mitigations for identity theft, or is it just game over when some joker pulls my details?

[Adair]

The usual questions...

the Government of the day needs to answer with more than bland platitudes:

+ How much will to actually cost, to setup, and to run?

+ What data will be collected, and who will have access to it?

+ What control will each of us have over how ‘our’ data is used?

+ How will the system cope with ‘false-positives’ – you are identified as someone else?

+ How will the system cope with ‘false-negatives’ – you failing to be identified as you?

+ How will failures and abuses be managed – what protections and recourse will be in place, will they be timely and will they properly compensate people for the negative impacts on their livelihoods and lives generally?

+ How will the system look after people who cannot access it, or who refuse on grounds of conscience?

+ How will the system be prevented from undergoing ‘mission creep’: “We promise that the system will only ever be used for A and B, and never for things like X or Y” – ten years later it is being used for A,B,C,D,X,Y, and Z is about to be added?

+ What will stop the ‘ID system’ being used to make the people of the nation de facto ‘possessions and servants of the state’, instead of ‘the state’ being servants to, and beholden to, the people of the nation?

+ Do we, the people, actually NEED the proposed system?

[R Soul]

Re: The usual questions...

SSSHHH! Don't ask questions like that! Starmercards are good for you. They solve everything.

[ChoHag]

Re: The usual questions...

Haha! "our" data. So cute...

I'm refusing on the grounds that I have no interest in being tethered to a big brother spy device that's only available from the US or China (not that I'd accept one from Blighty either but if we can't even build our own telescreen how far the empire has fallen...). However failures are going to be managed, I'll be one of those.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The usual questions...

Good stuff. Now frame the same or similar questions of the non-digital status quo.

1. How much does it actually cost to have every different government department issuing different bits of paper and plastic, and posting them out, some with photos on them others not?

2. How many different data warehouses does this setup create, and if they've been around for over 2 decades how secure are they?

3. Isn't it the case that the citizen has no control over how those data siloes are used, not to mention the "data owners" have an endemic attitude of "this data is OUR data not YOUR data" - complicating matters if they lose the data or the data is wrong and needs to be corrected? (This is even true of paper based medical records)

4. How prolific are "false positives" and "false negatives" in the current setup, and isn't it true that misidentification or misrepresentation is almost impossible to detect if there's no digital verification or digital audit trail?

5. How often are failures and abuses in the current systems dealt with by lengthy corrective processes without any compensation to the inconvenienced citizen?

6. How well does the legacy system cater for people who don't have passports OR driving licenses? (And, is the system even consistent - veteran card accepted here but not there, for example)

7. Did anything stop the current vague legacy ‘ID system’ being abused, leading people into having to get a driving license or passport even if they have no real need for either beyond the fact that there were one-off circumstances where no other form of verified photo ID would be accepted? (So much for “We promise that the system will only ever be used for A and B, and never for things like X or Y” )

Do we, the people, actually NEED the proposed system? - not all of us, but many thousands do. Reason being, the current system doesn't look after people who cannot access it.

Of course you can refuse to get a driving license, passport or CitizenCard on grounds of conscience... but there are many situations in modern life where that choice will not just massively inconvenience you, but make it a whole lot easier for criminals to impersonate you.

[Adair]

Re: The usual questions...

Not sure what your point is. Don't think anyone is suggesting the present arrangements are great, let alone ideal. Surely the point is whether the benefits significantly outweigh the drawbacks?

Arguably a having a single point of massive failure does not trump having multiple points of lesser failures, especially when it concerns a person's freedom to simply live, without constant intrusive/oppresive oversight by irresponsible agencies.

Although advertised to have the opposite effect, on the face of it, 'Digital ID' is a solution likely to create life changing problems. Surely we already have enough of those already without looking to create bigger ones?

So far no Govt. has managed to put forward a convincing case that such control over a person's life would be anything other than a disaster waiting to happen, and/or to be exploited.

[David Hicklin]

Re: The usual questions...

And will it even be fully implemented before the next general election ? It has to clear the House of Lords first, and as it was not in the party manifesto they can block it without any chance of the government overriding the block

Unless something cosmic happens this lot won't be in office after it , not sure who will as I don't think any party will get a majority which will make for fun times.

[Elongated Muskrat]

The announcement also said the public consultation on the scheme "will launch by the end of the year," a change of language from "later this year" when it was announced on September 26.

That's only a change of language if you're no good at interpreting weasel-words.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I'm sure nobody expects any policy change to this shit-headed idea from a consultation, and they're right, but I'll share a few observations here.

Normally, planning a proper government consultation requires a lot of time to have everything properly prepared and to ensure proper engagement with all interested parties. Then, even with a lot of bush-beating, a typical consultation gets a few hundred to a few thousand responses. A consultation on an exceptionally arcane and dull matter might have a dozen or fewer. However, when something is really contentious, such as Rees Mogg's idiotic imperial measures consultation then you get lots more - in that case 100,000 responses. As each consultation response has to be analysed, that caused a hell of kerfuffle, and swamped the tiny team who are responsible for such things, and loads of people had to be diverted from their main job to help do the work by hand, me included. And if you took your time to respond, I'd like to thank you for your valued responses - unless you were one of the ignorant c**ts who wasted their energies blaming and swearing at the Civil Service for running a consultation at the demand of a government minister of the day, in which case f*** off and learn how your government actually works and who is responsible for what. For those swearing at the relevant minister, PM or government of the day then I have no problem with that, we all enjoyed those responses.

Anyway, in this case we can expect what? For starters a rushed and poorly considered consultation that ministers have demanded has questions that are loaded towards a supportive outcome. Then it's going to be very high profile. so at a guess north of 250,000 consultation responses, maybe even over a million. How will they be handled? Well, I can assure you that now they'll tip into AI (see link below) and it'll spew out an LLM summary. This will be taken as an accurate synopsis of the responses, but ONLY after using heavy prompt engineering to get the most favourable reading from the responses. Then, regardless of what the balance of opinion actually is, our lightweight, lacklustre PM will announce that the consultation has raised issues that ministers will give careful consideration to during the implementation of ID cards. There won't be any debate in government "should we/shouldn't we", because he and the other wankers of the Labour party don't actually care about what the public think, they just want to press on with this and the other spectacularly bad and pointless ideas they've plucked out of their poorly qualified backsides - NHS reorganisation, local government reorganisation, ID cards, using AI in government etc.

Reading and reflecting, para two explains how government actually works, unfortunately. You didn't think ministers care what you think, did you?

https://ai.gov.uk/projects/consult/

[ChoHag]

I think we've found the writer for the next series of the documentary Yes Minister.

[Great Bu]

"Don't track me !"

....types outraged commentard on device that already tracks them and sells all that data to absolutely anybody in the world even if they think they are clever and have turned off all those activities......

[Adair]

Re: "Don't track me !"

so that's alright then? Just because it's already a shit show means it's just fine for us to pay our government to add to the shit that already exists.

[ChoHag]

Re: "Don't track me !"

Some of us don't want to be tracked and know how to, and can, actively avoid it. We are rare.

Don't blame the normies for disliking how they've been swindled and lied to but are unable to do anything about it.

People have a right to be upset when they get fucked against their will, even if they have no choice. I believe they have a word for that...

[ComicalEngineer]

All we need now...

... is for Crapita to be given the contract.

In all seriousness this could well be Starmer's "Poll Tax" moment.

(For our non-UK readers that was the policy that ended Margaret Thatcher as PM).

[Like a badger]

Re: All we need now...

"In all seriousness this could well be Starmer's "Poll Tax" moment."

Only if somebody will stab Starmer in the back, and the problem there is that the parliamentary Labour party doesn't have anyone with knife-related talents, nor are there any good quality challengers likely to rally their MPs even after a year of chaotic under-achievement. Even though not a Labour voter myself, I had such high hopes of Starmer being dull but competent but in the event he's turned out to be dull and incompetent.

Latest IPSOS polls show 79% of voters disapprove of Starmer's performance compared to 13% who do, and with a net dissatisfaction of -66%, Starmer has the lowest rating of any PM (including Truss, May and Johnson) of the last 45 years, and he's had the fastest fall in his approval of any newly elected PM. And yet there's still no challenge. I wonder if the forthcoming budget will be the trigger point? If there's any back stabbing does go on, then my money's on that talent-free weasel Streeting.

[Fonant]

Re: All we need now...

Zack Polanski is pretty impressive. The Green Party are progressive, tolerant, and socialist. Their membership is booming, so there is hope.

[AJ MacLeod]

Re: All we need now...

The Greens are tolerant? You are funny...

[IanRS]

Re: All we need now...

The Greens are very tolerant: they stated that they will end illegal migration by making all migration legal. Everybody is welcome, and you don't get more tolerant than that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: All we need now...

That's a great idea.

Human beings are human beings. You have no control over where you were born, and looking at most of you english these days, being british-born isn't exactly a plus-point.

Besides, the majority of immigrants are only that way because of your government joining ours in oil related wars.

[James O'Shea]

Re: All we need now...

The Greens are one step ahead of PETA. This is not a compliment.

[seldom]

Re: All we need now...

You forgot the sarcasm icon

[tiggity]

Re: All we need now...

@Fonant

Tolerant? The greens hate women (unless those women are men in frocks or their acolytes as opposed to gender critical feminist women)

Polanski is a grifter (changed his name, moved from Lib Dems to Greens as his political career was not progressing to his liking in Lib Dems, and of course "hypnotits" scammer - to name just a few red flags)

[ajadedcynicaloldfart]

Re: All we need now...

@Like a badger

"Only if somebody will stab Starmer in the back, and the problem there is that the parliamentary Labour party doesn't have anyone with knife-related talents" >snip

Oh I don't know, You have never heard of Peter Mandelson?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: All we need now...

Yes, but he's history now. And with his Epstein association out there, there isn't any path back.

Funny isn't it, any cove that's associated with Epstein is a total outcast, unless they're a fat orange felon in which case they get a state visit.

[seldom]

Re: All we need now...

Or Bill Gates

[seldom]

Re: All we need now...

or Bill Clinton

[graeme leggett]

Re: All we need now...

Apples and Oranges. Truss had the support of the media to prop up her image and only lasted 49 days. Want to guess where her approval could have been after a year?

[James O'Shea]

Re: All we need now...

Wilted.

[Goodwin Sands]

Re: All we need now...

@graeme leggett

No she did not. She was ridiculed from the get go. If she had the support of the media then the limp lettuce thing would never have gained the traction it did. Even the Telegraph was quoting sources saying she was bonkers.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: All we need now...

Um, because she was. It was hardly a media conspiracy against her. Even those that propped her up had to change their tune when they saw their pensions going.

[jonesp]

Re: All we need now...

Rory Stewart met Liz Truss when Truss was in charge of a government department that had Rural Affairs in its title.

She said something like, "I don't believe in rural affairs, Rory. There's no effective difference between cities and the countryside".

Stewart wrote about it in his book, "Politics on the Edge".

I think Stewart found that Truss had no time for detail. She seemed to want everything simplified to the point of absurdity.

[Jamie Jones]

Re: All we need now...

Labour lost Caerphilly, only getting 11% of the vote! (Fortunately, Plaid won, rather than Reform)

Starmer, Kowtowing to genociders, not calling brexit for what it is (so as not to offend the clinically insane who still think brexit was a good idea), and trying to win the manufactured immigrant crisis charade to appease the right needs to realise those people will continue to stick with their party, whilst he loses all the sane voters.

He seems to be more loyal to his detractors than his typical base.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: All we need now...

"Only if somebody will stab Starmer in the back, and the problem there is that the parliamentary Labour party doesn't have anyone with knife-related talents, "

So that's what all "knife amnesty" campaigns are really about.

[BartyFartsLast]

Re: All we need now...

The problem isnt that labour have nobody to plant the blade, it's that they want this ID card.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: All we need now...

" All we need now...

... is for Crapita to be given the contract."

Or Fujitsu!

[Anonymous Coward]

Cat's already out the bag

Regardless of what the PM claims digital ID is about this week, the minister in charge of the scheme, Darren Jones, has already labelled it the "bedrock of the modern state".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/digital-id-card-keir-starmer-migration-b2834193.html

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Bedrock and the Modern State

Bedrock.

That's where the Flintstones lived!

[Anonymous Coward]

Blatant hypocrisy

"For people who simply don't want it, well, they don't need it – apart from the right to work."

"The digital ID is about putting power back in people's hands"

- and how exactly is forcing conscientious objectors onto the dole going to put power in their hands?

Let's parse it another way:

"In order to try and stop evil foreigners from fucking over our society, we're going to fuck you over our own way."

[Flocke Kroes]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

Please please can we have some foreigners over here taking the shit jobs brits are too proud to do. I want their taxes paying our pensions and NHS. I want the smart ones fleeing the Kingdom of Trumpland too.

[J.G.Harston]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

It's not jobs Brits are too proud to do. It's jobs Brits can't *AFFORD* to do.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

Yes, it would mean giving up too many of their benefits, so they'd be worse off.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

I'm fascinated to know how an immigrant can afford to do a job a Brit can't?

[xyz123]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

Ask Starmer. he has people working at his various properties under minimum wage via various 'schemes' and classifying the properties under 'national security'

[J.G.Harston]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

I'm fascinated to know how an immigrant can afford to do a job a Brit can't.

Rent in UK 650 quid a month, rent in Poland 100 quid a month. Three months working in Lincolnshire picking spuds pays Polish chap's entire year's living costs in Poland, sends Brits bankrupt.

You do realise that when working on a farm YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY FOR YOUR HOME BACK HOME. Just because you're not actually in the house your mortgage/rent doesn't stop. Or do you think agricultural workers sell their house/terminate their tenancy before going off to work for the summer, HUMP THEIR ENTIRE WORLD WITH THEM to the farm, then try and buy/rent somewhere new when finished?

[BartyFartsLast]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

You're a lunatic.

My mortgage doesn't stop when I go to work, I don't get a discount for the time I spend outside my home either. The problem here isn'tt migrant workers, it's the fucking farmers, the supermarkets etc.

[David Hicklin]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

> I want their taxes paying our pensions and NHS. I want the smart ones fleeing the Kingdom of Trumpland too

The problem I suspect is that most of them are working cash in hand (if anything - modern slavery is a thing after all) and not paying any taxes (well not income tax anyway), and the people they work for won't give a damm about this digital right to work card as they don't do any checks now anyway.

[Blazde]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

and how exactly is forcing conscientious objectors onto the dole going to put power in their hands?

This is where it's going to come unstuck. Public finances on the brink and they're understandably doing everything they can to balance stimulating the economy with taxing that economy as efficiently as possible. In this context, a project which both costs money, and introduces friction to employment is surely too counter-productive to pursue. The sooner someone realises that the better.

Starmer gets a lot of stick but usually his decisions have some kind of logic to them, even the ones that blow. This one just doesn't. If it's meant to be a solution to illegal working by migrants it's dead-on-arrival, both in terms of basic logic and because it's failed to outsmart any other party (with the possible exception of the Tories who need no help with that right now). If he's got carried away following the Blair playbook someone needs to shake him awake and remind him who's prime minister in 2025.

I fear though it's worse. That he's got carried away believing AI & technology must always, somehow, inevitably be the solution to everything and will somehow solve the UK's supposed productivity issues. The same careless worship of technology which - without meaning to go full Luddite - has decimated the British car industry for the last 2 months.

[David Hicklin]

Re: Blatant hypocrisy

> and how exactly is forcing conscientious objectors onto the dole going to put power in their hands?

Bet you will need this digital ID to claim the dole/benefits ? It will creep just like any other scheme

[Laura Kerr]

Welcome to Groundhog Day

So he's been down in Brighton, yabbering about bank customers being "really excited about it". Cue a mahoosive attack of deja vu - nearly sixteen years ago, the Jacqboot was havering about how Mancunians were itching to get their mitts on ID cards. Which turned out to be a complete load of caca. Meg Hillier was equally enthusiastic. Or even more so, given the figures she conjured up out of thin air.

Of course, the BBC obligingly helped her along. I don't doubt they'll try the same trick again.

[nobody who matters]

Re: Welcome to Groundhog Day

Bearing mind that every time that Barclays have closed my 'Home' branch and moved my account to the next nearest one (before subsequently closing that one too), they write to me to tell me that reason for the closure is because nobody is going into the branches anymore, so I am surprised that Sir Kier actuallly found any customers in the Brighton branch in the first place.

It would have been a big enough challenge to find an actual branch of Barclays to start with - they have mostly shrunk back to only having an actual branch in the county town around my region of the UK. My current 'Home' branch is now one of those banking hub thingies (which doesn't offer any counter services, or indeed very much in the way of any of the things one would actually go into a physical branch to do. I now have to post any cheques that I recieve to the pit of despond named Rotherham!).

[Blazde]

Re: Welcome to Groundhog Day

We’re lucky round here. When they closed the big old Barclays branch (which had already been reduced to one cashier and some automated thingies a few years earlier) they opened a 'Barclays Local' in the local library. What a good idea! Picture of the rough setup for context - looks cosy but helpful doesn't it? https://www.barclays.co.uk/content/dam/branchfinder/pods/Barclays%20MicroPOD%20new.jpg

Now after just 26 months they're closing that too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Welcome to Groundhog Day

That was probably always their intention

[tiggity]

Re: Welcome to Groundhog Day

Do what I did.

If your bank shuts down local branches, change to a bank that has local branches.

That is what I did (though its a building society rather than a bank that has local branches that I switched to)

Otherwise the scum just keep getting away with closing branches.

[steelpillow]

Persecution Day

So, if you don't qualify or you refuse on principle, your existing employer has you over a barrel. You have to take every scumbag abuse and exploitation they throw at you, or face being thrown onto the muckpile of the unemployed and unemployable. Enjoy the choice!

[David Hicklin]

Re: Persecution Day

> your existing employer has you over a barrel.

" except those staying with their current employer until retirement. "

[elsergiovolador]

Gaslighting

"You'll never need ID to go into a hospital or anything like that," he said. "For people who simply don't want it, well, they don't need it - apart from the right to work."

You also don't have to breathe if you don't want to.

Are they that maliciously stupid?

[steelpillow]

Re: Gaslighting

> Are they that maliciously stupid?

More likely they are just thoughtlessly stupid, having never heard of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

The only people to benefit from this will be those rich and powerful enough to do the employing - or not, as they feel inclined. Now what's what I call core Labour Socialism!

[ChoHag]

Re: Gaslighting

It's not malice. That's asking too much of them.

[J.G.Harston]

Re: Gaslighting

"You'll never need ID to go into a hospital or anything like that," he said.

And from the other end of the argument, that just completely destroys the whole point of it, as the people who would support ID cards would be supporting it to STOP people accessing Our NHS.

[regrets4u]

Gov working at cross purposes.

So you have to make my iphone the key to all things important with Digital ID at the same time your stripping me of ADP. Is it just me or is that insane?

[Anonymous Coward]

Weak point?

I've worked out how to defeat this diabolical digital ID scheme. There are currently 72 recognised genders and it is widely established that people can be gender fluid, switching their presentation on a daily or even hourly basis. Therefore, each of us should demand recognition of 72 separate and unique identities! This will quickly lead to the entire system grinding to a halt and make it completely unfit for purpose.

You can all thank me later.

[martinusher]

Its more than just a convenient ID

OffGuardian, that sump of conspiracy theories, actually comes out with gems from time to time and their recent piece on Digital ID should give people pause for thought. My status as an naive sucker meant I thought it was just a variation on those keycard things that we've been using for ever to access workplaces and the like. I had absolutely no idea that the plan was more like a Facebook level collection of user data and habits so that our friend and benefactor, Big Brother, could get to know us a lot better. This might be what's behind the skepticism and pushback although I doubt if it will do any good. If you go anywhere in Europe you'll see that everyone is carrying an ID card, its now a necessity in most parts of the world if you want to work, bank, rent/buy and generally live. Having to use such an ID allows tracking, just not quite as detailed as a full digital ID would.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its more than just a convenient ID

There's certainly a concerted global push for Digital ID at the moment.

The Swiss were recently asked to voted again on the matter, having most inconveniently chosen the wrong decision last time. Yes, passed with an exceedingly slim majority.

Swiss voters have narrowly approved a plan to introduce voluntary electronic identity cards.

With all votes counted, 50.4% of those who voted said yes to the proposal, while 49.6% rejected it. The closeness of the ballot is a surprise. Opinion polls had suggested up to 60% backed digital IDs, which also had the approval of the Swiss government, and both houses of parliament. It was Switzerland's second vote on digital IDs. An earlier proposal was rejected in 2021, amid concerns the data would be held centrally, and controlled largely by private providers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdr624j16jpo

The EU brought eID into law last year. Notice the very similar language and justifications used in the press release. It's all about making our lives easier!

The adoption of the European digital identity regulation is a milestone in our society’s digital transformation. Enabling citizens to have a unique and secure European digital wallet while remaining in full control of their personal data is a key step forward for the EU, which will set a global benchmark in the digital field and enhance security when engaging with online services. Moreover, by putting citizens at the centre, the European digital identity regulation contributes to significantly improving and simplifying access to public services online. Citizens should not have to bear the burden of administrative and institutional complexity.

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/03/26/european-digital-identity-eid-council-adopts-legal-framework-on-a-secure-and-trustworthy-digital-wallet-for-all-europeans/

Finally, China just ratified their Internet ID.

On July 15, China passed new legislation known as the National Network Identity Authentication, also called Internet ID.

Under this new law, Chinese citizens would voluntarily enroll via a government app, submitting their true name and a facial scan, after which they would be issued a unique ID code used for all online accounts. As of May, approximately 6 million individuals had already obtained IDs during the pilot phase.

Based upon the nature of the control the Chinese Communist Party has over media and censorship, it is not surprising the Chinese government desires the ability to track its population during their internet sessions, especially those citizens who would be critical of the current regime or dissidents that are living outside mainland China.

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/5512706-china-internet-id-law/

Looks like our dear leaders are using 1984 as a guidebook, rather than a warning!

[Anonymous Coward]

Promises from Kier Starmer and Liz Kendall................

.......saying that Digital ID will not be extended beyond "work verification"..........are direct lies............

.......because Kier and Liz CANNOT make promises which bind on future administrations.

Usual misdirection....they think someone might believe them!!!!!

[bitwise]

Compulsory for anyone getting a job?

What, in the actual fuck?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the utterly naff original tweet but mostly for the many excellent replies

https://nitter.net/Keir_Starmer/status/1981412929762099673

[Boris56789]

The Fear seems over egged.

In reality there is enough cameras, phones, ATM cards and internal business id cards used day to day to track everyone ten times over.

I think it's laughable this ...oh it's so they can listen to our convo. What you need a card for that wake up the can activate microphones on any number of devices in your home and your mobile if they so wanted to listen in on you.

This is a plain and simple one and ironic as it's a certain age group who love a bit of Reform that is why this was pushed again....

Tax wise and tracking their and benefit...they have your NI number and can monitor bank accounts by law if they so wish to see what is going in and out.

If they wanted to surcharge you due to diet again. Payments now done as contactless have enough details to match to store reps to match with clubcard or other tools to track your eating habits. No need for ID there..

Tbh, if it means a just scan qr code and then an Auth code for services Vs text messages for gov online services makes life easier and NHS and perscriptions they can scan your card or have an e wallet version for your phone so next or kin or temp person to pick up meds for you when I'll rather than dob and form ticking.

NHS A&E or hospital your NI and NHS can be aligned to a scan of the card on a reader and biometric and Auth less need for what is your dob and all more nurse types to work out what the issue is and how to get you sorted.

If you were worried about privacy and other issues should of pushed back years ago and if you worry about the deep state than if your not doing anything to get on their radar than nothing to worry about and same with police.

Like I say all the concerns raised so far they can access anyway and ask anyone old enough from the world wars when ID was used and they have no issues and same for multiple modern states that can use it for internal flights etc.

Very much red under the bed conspiracy and the talk of facists ironically that is the Reformers you need to look out for there lol. They say they are against this then you have to ask what tracking and identifying they have planned as it will be the times worse.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: The Fear seems over egged.

"What you need a card for that wake up the can activate microphones on any number of devices in your home and your mobile if they so wanted to listen in on you."

Did you even read the article? Or any of the many other articles and broadcasts in the media? It's not a physical card. It's app on your phone. So yes, it will been "all access permissions" on your phone and yes, microphone access will be one of them.

[Anonymous Coward]

You get what you vote for

Hey, look at America.

[Will Godfrey]

Re: You get what you vote for

No Thanks.

[Neil Maybin]

Superfluous without actual value

“Digital ID will be compulsory for anyone taking a new job”. So a National Insurance number. I thought that we all had to have one of those already?

[bernmeister]

It wont work well for some.

This digital ID is linked with GOV.UK One Login. Have a go at setting up your ID and using it on a GOV.UK site. I needed to replace a driving licence online. The multiple "prove your ID" loops were endless. I contacted GOV.UK describing the problem and was told there was insufficient information held to confirm my ID. I have held many UK passports. Five in row. Had bank accounts dating back decades but the explanation was that the ID verification was done by a third party who did not have enough data. I was eventually given a link to the old DVLA online lycence form,

[ChrisElvidge]

I'm surprised no one has commented yet

I am not a number, I am a free man.

[Ken Shabby]

Re: I'm surprised no one has commented yet

“I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own".

[DMcDonnell]

Re-nameing doesn't work

A turd by any other name still stinks.

[xyz123]

Starmer had meetings with google and apple.

He demanded the core of the digital ID app must silently install itself on ALL devices, be completely unable to be disabled or uninstalled.

The app should have silent unlimited ability to turn location services ON and send user location info without the user being notified.

Essentially Starmer has now done what only conspiracy nutcases claimed someone would do.

He's physically trying to ORDER that all phones have 24/7 unstoppable location service tracking the government can use without a warrant.

Fortunately Google and Apple pushed back and said this would utterly RUIN their businesses as people would switch to older phones without location services / apps etc and leave their smartphone at home.

[Anonymous Coward]

Only because he does not understand the first thing about digital

What we have to remember is, Starmer comes from a legal background where everything has to be a drawn-out, Gormenghastian nightmare full of inscrutable manual processes, and which still kills more trees than any other profession. There has always been a widespread, steadfast refusal to adopt even digital workflow tools. Basically, they've only just got to a point where they'll accept evidence in PDF form rather than hardcopy, and even then they insist on having multiple PDFs merged into one insanely big thing that's impossible to navigate instead of just having separate hyperlinked PDFs with version control on them like any other normal profession has been doing for a quarter of a century. On top of which they use an antiquated form of the English language that fails every readability test and which doesn't exist outside of their own profession.

Starmer thinks of Digital ID in that context, not in a real world one. So he makes fundamentally wrong assumptions.

There are plenty of publications that explain how digital ID verification (as a generic process) should work, and which explain how any digital ID app (public or private) should work. There are simple explainers for "self-sovereign identity" and "digital wallet". In effect, having a wallet app with your Passport / Driving License / CitizenCard in it is conceptually and technologically not that different in its operation to you having a Google/Apple wallet with a bank card / train ticket / hotel booking confirmation / supermarket loyalty card in it. If you really do prefer to carry a physical wallet around with those artefacts in it, and printed hardcopies, then nothing is stopping you.

But if you wouldn't hand over your personal phone, bank cards, train tickets etc. to a complete random, and let them take that stuff out of your sight, why would you ever actively prefer to have a legacy system where anyone from any agency can ask to see your birth certificate, driving license or passport, manhandle them, and even take them away for photocopying etc?

On that level, the opposition to digital ID on grounds of the potential for abuse needs to be balanced with the recognition that the legacy way of checking ID (as haphazard as it often is) is hardly any better..

[Anonymous Coward]

A Belgian on the Eurostar to London...

...today had a print of his boarding pass in his hand.

I said, oh you've got a print on paper like I have. He said his name was Luigi, an Italian name, living in Belgium, he was 35.

"You never know", said Luigi, "My phone might run out of battery".

I asked what he thought of having to get a passport in Belgium because the UK won't accept Belgian ID cards.

He said it was ridiculous that he had to get a passport just for a three-day visit to London. He seemed happy about having a Belgian ID card. It seemed to me that for him it was normal.

France issues free ID cards too. I have heard that the Continental school coaches have started to reappear in Canterbury because the British government is no longer quite so mad about insisting on passports for all visitors.

I no longer support "No to ID - Say No to the Database State". I now feel that having a digital status on a smartphone as well as a physical card is ordinary public administration, I have signed up early for the Gov UK One Login App.

I have already had to do proof of identity with a smartphone app and my driving licence for Companies House. It felt odd doing that for the first time I admit.

At the moment the One Logon App says the only thing it will work with at the moment is the Forces Veterans card.

It is still a disgrace that EU citizens apart from Irish with residence rights in the UK are right now still being made to rely entirely on a smartphone app to prove their rights. It can go wrong.

It has even swapped photos between people on the system and done it twice to the same person. How on earth could cross parts of records like that??

[RedPillSwallowed]

Always was

"more about rummaging through drawers"

Which fools ever thought this was for any honest or benign purpose? And you think this is bad, wait for the trump (excuse pun) card of CBDC. At that point we are slaves or cattle.

[MrGreen]

Blair is Still Running the Show

https://institute.global/insights/politics-and-governance/time-for-digital-id-a-new-consensus-for-a-state-that-works

[tstaddon]

Devil's Advocate - Why "No to Digital ID !" == "I See No Ships"

How much has the complete lack of join-up between different state issued IDs caused big problems for a range of demographics and circumstances? There's a cavalier attitude from people who've never had direct experience of severe inconvenience or even civil/legal problems, refusing to even acknowledge, let alone tolerate any possible viable fix for, the problems that OTHER PEOPLE regularly have to deal with.

A few examples:

1. People finding out that their tax rebates are being siphoned off by someone claiming to be them who's registered a tax account in their name but redirected the address. No sanity checks. (I know two people this has happened to.)

2. Some poor unsuspecting people have suddenly found that the Land Registry has handed over the deeds to their property to a complete unknown, based on nothing more then assertions without proof and certainly no ID verification having been attempted to confirm that the person taking control of the house/land has any connection at all to the rightful owner.

3. People who've been told to post their birth certificate, driving license, marriage certificate and proof of current address to a certain outfit in north Yorkshire which operates a public sector service. Even if it's sent signed recorded, and definitely arrived there, they hear nothing for weeks and contact said agency who then deny receiving it. Eventually they take their finger out and process that ID, but if the individual has any other burning need to use their driving license or birth certificate for any other purpose, they have to get it replaced because they have no idea how long it'll be before (or even if) they get their stuff back.

4. Landlords who claim a future tenant who hasn't picked up the keys yet "failed" a right to rent check purely in order to pull out of a contract. With a manual right to rent check, the landlord's "statutory excuse" is completely ungainsayable, even if provably false - which comes in very handy if someone else is offering to pay a couple of hundred quid more per month. Some canny tenants are now actively looking for landlords who will accept digital ID verification (for legal immigrants, there are share codes, e-visas and suchlike; for British citizens, there are services like Post Office, CitizenCard, Yoti and ThirdFort). Another thing: landlords should never hold onto someone's passport after a manual check - it is a serious violation of the tenant's rights if they do. But why should you even be asked to give it to them in the first place?

5. Companies House has tens of thousands of fake businesses registered with fake ID to false addresses; this has been known about for donkeys years and there are even examples of hundreds of fake companies with fake directors claiming to have tens of billion pounds of assets, all linked to the same service address. This is why ID&V is now being made compulsory at Companies House, and why directors have to go through ID verification now.

6. Related to 5 - how many times have rogue traders, cowboy landlords and other assorted crooked businesses stymied law enforcement or civil proceedings by making spurious arguments that while their "phoenixed" company has the same assets at the same address with the same directors running the show, it's completely unconnected to the business that's being sued by the people it stiffed?

I'd really love to hear how we could fix these problems and many others WITHOUT digital ID verification. The demented consequences of "this is my paper ID, all of it is genuine because I say it is!" + "I don't accept your ID is valid simply because I choose not to accept dog-ears" + "Either the dog ate your paperwork or it got lost in the post" can be avoided with digital ID; they are baked into the legacy system.

[Ken G]

If it's about convenience

How about tattooing a QR code on people's foreheads?

Then they won't need to worry about having a compatible phone or their battery dying at the wrong time. It can link to the central database and the scanner can compare their biometrics to those on file.