The UK government has revived an idea that has already had one funeral. Digital ID, once buried in a flurry of opposition and civil liberty concerns, is now back on the table. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is reportedly giving serious thought to a national digital identification system, presented as a way to make it look like he’s doing something about illegal immigration.
This move comes in the context of ongoing pressure on the government to respond to rising Channel crossings and the broader debate around migration enforcement.
Ministers are eager to be seen doing something effective. A digital ID system offers the image of precision and modernity.
It also raises serious questions about privacy, personal freedom, and the limits of state power.
Rebecca Vincent from Big Brother Watch issued a direct statement: “While Downing Street is scrambling to be seen as doing something about illegal immigration, we are sleepwalking into a dystopian nightmare where the entire population will be forced through myriad digital checkpoints to go about our everyday lives.”
Her warning echoes long-standing fears. The proposed system would not just apply to newly arrived migrants or foreign nationals. It would apply to everyone.
Routine activities like applying for a job, renting a flat, or registering with a doctor could involve compulsory checks.
This vision is built into the logic of national ID systems that have been tried elsewhere and, in some cases, walked back after public resistance.
Vincent made her point clear: “Mandatory digital ID…will not stop small boat crossings, but it will create a burden on the already law-abiding population to prove our right to be here. It will turn Britain into a ‘Papers, please’ society.”
Tony Blair’s original ID card plan fell apart in 2010 after years of resistance. His government spent millions trying to convince the public that the cards would improve national security and reduce fraud. The scheme never gained traction.
The fingerprints of that original plan remain on this new proposal. Through his think tank, Blair has continued to advocate for a digital identification regime. He is now in a position to influence Starmer.
Conservative MP and Shadow Justice Minister Robert Jenrick questioned the practical use of digital ID cards. His assessment cuts through the surface appeal of new technology: “Most employers who are employing individuals illegally are doing so knowingly. Asking them to check ID cards rather than the current checks that they are already obliged to do is not going to make a blind bit of difference to illegal migration.”
His point stands in opposition to the idea that more paperwork or digital checkpoints will bring employers into compliance. The infrastructure to verify employment status already exists. Those breaking the law are not struggling with confusion; they are simply choosing to ignore it.
Digital identity systems are not isolated tools. Once built, they tend to expand in purpose. The scope of ID checks could grow to include housing, healthcare, education access, and financial services. The intention may begin with migration control. The end result often reshapes how citizens interact with nearly every public or private service.
Previous debates over national ID cards included concerns over cost, data protection, mission creep, and the inevitable risk of abuse.
These issues remain in place. The main difference is the technical landscape. The technology is more advanced, the data more valuable, and the consequences more far-reaching.
