In utopia it all works fine and we all live happily ever after because it stops all crime. The end.
We don't live in utopia. There are criminals. And mistakes happen.
So here's a big question
What happens if someone steals your identity card? What happens if there's an error on your identity? What happens if the system isn't functioning correctly?
How do you prove it wasn't you who did x, y or z?The computer says you did. The computer is always right. Your just a human and aren't trustworthy.
Hello Fujitsu Horizon System and the Post Office.
To give another recent example.
There was an example the other week on the BBC news where a guy got fined for parking his car because he'd been there for ten mins then moved and then a car (completely different type) parked in the same place but the number plate was one digit different.
He had a nightmare sorting the problem and demonstrating it wasn't his car. The computer said his car was there cos it read it's number plate - except it only read part of his number plate and didn't fully compare.
We assume that because it's on a computer it's correct. But the data is only as good as the information entered - which can include human error, human crime or database corruption because a programmer makes a human error (the simple example here is for whatever reason a spreadsheet number slips a line because there's a slight mistake, so all the subsequent values are out of line).
Technical issues with data based set up.
This does happen, especially when setting up new systems or transferring data from one system to another.
This is a crucial point of weakness.
One of the biggest issues traditional banks currently face is when their data is on an old system in an old programming language which is now defunct but they've been carrying on with old programmers patching it all together. But these programmers are becoming rarer and harder to find so inevitably the technology and personal issues is forcing transfer to newer systems. These transfers tend to happen at low usage points and usually happen without incident and are tested before it goes live to the public so you don't see it. But sometimes someone makes a massive cock up.
What we are talking about is transferring and merging data from several huge aging data bases into one larger modern one. And it will be done by idiots who really shouldn't do the job because the government has decided to do it on the cheap rather than pick a contractor who has the expertise to do it. Not only that but large parts of it probably will be outsourced to out of the UK (what could possibly go wrong with that in terms of security).
Now what might work in another European country who is either smaller or has had identity cards on a preexisting system for a long time might not be so easy to set up in 2025.
For starters we have one of the largest national populations in Europe with over 65million people. That's a bit different to say Sweden or even the Netherlands. And we are talking about merging multiple data sets - that's not something that Germany has to contend with because their system was set up so long ago and didn't have the same volume of data to deal with.
It's a LOT of information
Then your data will be held in a central place - possibly with inadequate security (cos they've tried to do it on the cheap). Meanwhile they've criminalised everyone who doesn't have an identity.
Then there's concerns about centralising full stop.
This makes this data base the absolute golden target for every damn criminal going. Your identity card is worth stealing. Your identity is worth stealing. If nothing works without this one central database (point of failure) then you increase your weakness to national security issues at a time when cyber security and warfare is being regarded as one of the biggest threats to the UK. Think about it - it's putting all your eggs into a single basket.
There are actually benefits to having your NHS details separate from your DVLA details and your passport details. If one is compromised you can still access / use your other ones. This protects you better as an individual citizen. It also makes your personal data less of a target in a lot of ways.
Keep in mind we are talking about state sanctioned computer crime being a rising thing.
There has been a lot in the news about how north Koreans have done this in various ways:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpdnz3elwzvo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2l2yn5zmxo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61474771
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8vedz4yk7o
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/12/north-korea-remote-workers-us-tech-companies-00340208
The number of security checks you now have to go through to get a job at some companies is mad. And actually an ID card system wouldnt help because it's actually be too vulnerable and too weak. DH certainly had to give other forms of proof to confirm his employment history.
The danger in going to an ID card system is we become too reliant on it and assume it's right, then eliminate other documents etc and put it all into this one system. Thus weakening ourselves to tackling crime all whilst making this one system much more of a target.
This is also without considering the power it gives to a government - and the abuses that it could lead to. Who has access to that information? Who could misuse that information and in what ways. China is the obvious example of why this might not be a good thing. It's too easy to assume that we live in a democracy, nothing bad could happen. But we have human rights abuses by the state. This would make them easier to commit and harder to resolve.
The assumption that only 'bad people' might have issues is one that just doesn't hold weight based on real world examples and real world practical concern and considerations.
It's very naive to not consider these issues (and many more), because we have a simplistic understanding of the implications and the way it might be put together and operate.
Frankly, knowing enough about the experiences DH has had working at places which handle sensitive data / cyber security and the fecklessness and sometimes appalling management and terrible quality staff when outsourcing, combined with the governments track record on big database projects I have very little faith or confidence in the concept.
Nice idea, doomed to HS2 levels of success if it comes to fruition. Many because the people proposing it aren't technical and don't have a fucking c.
lue.