Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think that Digital ID will not stop illegal immigration, and nor is it a good idea?

382 replies

Westfacing · 25/09/2025 16:08

How will this prevent boat crossings?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
loulouljh · 26/09/2025 18:55

It won't. You are supposed to check the right to work now. Those who don't now will continue to not do it.

YelloDaisy · 26/09/2025 18:58

People need to untwist their knickers about these small boats

say 500 men a day - that’s about 3,500 a week, 175,000 a year. Half a million over 3-4 years. Yeah stop getting your knickers in a twist.

PrivacyDystopia · 26/09/2025 19:34

Westfacing · 26/09/2025 16:16

From what Lisa Nandy said this morning, they will be mandatory for when you apply for a job, nothing else at this stage.

She said they wouldn't be required for using the NHS - which is at odds with what I've hear from pro-ID politicians saying it will make accessing public services much easier!

Exactly! We’re already getting mixed messages and seed planting. “We’ll just bring it in for accessing work, to stop illegals taking our jobs”. (Which it won’t anyway), but it will then be gradually extended until you can’t access anything without it and it will be compulsory for everyone. Don’t believe them when they say “it’ll just be for this one thing”. It won’t and they are already hinting at it.

Also something that has just occurred to me is that if this is only (at least initially) needed for workers, the only people who will be required to have them are the poor and working middle classes, the rich won’t need them, they don’t usually have jobs (and they can certainly choose to opt out by not working stress poorer people don’t have that privilege). They live off assets, or run their own businesses. So it’s only the poor and middle classes who’ll have this forced on them. The only ones who might be stopped and asked to provide their digital ID. This is an issue on so many levels.

Will we also be forced to allow the app to track our location? Some apps refuse to work without allowing this and if on, they can track location in the background even when closed. Apps are also notorious for data sharing, even when you have tracking/data sharing turned off, it can’t stop it completely. And you won’t necessarily even know about it. What data will this app be sharing and with whom? If it can track you/share your data, a tracking/data sharing app that is compulsory and that only the poor or middle classes have to have is incredibly dystopian. Fuck me.

Lullabycrickets23 · 26/09/2025 19:37

Where I originally come from, we always had Id cards. Now electronic ones. None of us feels our rights are undermined, why would they?

PrivacyDystopia · 26/09/2025 19:39

YelloDaisy · 26/09/2025 18:58

People need to untwist their knickers about these small boats

say 500 men a day - that’s about 3,500 a week, 175,000 a year. Half a million over 3-4 years. Yeah stop getting your knickers in a twist.

This won’t stop the “small boats” though. ID cards won’t stop them, and it will do nothing to stop people working illegally, however Labour are trying to spin this.

PrivacyDystopia · 26/09/2025 19:45

Lullabycrickets23 · 26/09/2025 19:37

Where I originally come from, we always had Id cards. Now electronic ones. None of us feels our rights are undermined, why would they?

Well you probably can’t speak for everyone in every country that has ID cards tbf. And no you likely don’t see a problem, until you have a problem. That’s how mass surveillance works, if they brought it all in overnight, people would be appalled and be up in arms about it. What they do instead is gradually increase surveillance over a period of time, making every small step palatable by framing it “making you safer”, “protecting the children” and “beating crime” etc, and its drip drip drip, until one day you look up and realise you are deep in the plot of 1984 or some other dystopian nightmare. You have to resist from the start, by the time you have a problem, it’s way too late.

Plumedenom · 27/09/2025 05:54

Notice how Starmer is "set to announce". That means he hasn't announced it yet. Because he wants to see how many people will stop voting for him if he does it. Well Starmer, if you're reading, you've already just proved to me that you're not someone I want to vote for.
Anyway I read somewhere that ID cards are always introduced in a time of moral panic, with limited success at resolving the source of the moral panic. And this case is no exception.
No coincidence that they are mainly introduced in fascist regimes.

YelloDaisy · 27/09/2025 05:54

Well everything is already a huge hacking target - nurseries ( as in the news at the moment), banks, HMRC, NHS, every major corporation (M&S, the coop), schools - that is a poor reason.

Anything that removes randoms from our streets has to be good or better than nothing

RedRiverShore5 · 27/09/2025 06:05

How are they going to verify the IDs of those that haven't got passports, not everyone will know someone of good standing in the community or a business owner for two years

RubySquid · 27/09/2025 06:07

BettysRoasties · 25/09/2025 16:15

It would helpfully help weed out more of the underground workers who don’t have the right to work. Things that make stuff like that harder do tend to deter at least some.

Many places have some type of ID system.

I don’t have a big issue with it but maybe I’m just not tin foil hat enough.

I have no issues at all tbh In fact id be quite happy to be " chipped". so can scan arm scanned rather than keep hunting for documentation

RubySquid · 27/09/2025 06:09

PrivacyDystopia · 26/09/2025 19:45

Well you probably can’t speak for everyone in every country that has ID cards tbf. And no you likely don’t see a problem, until you have a problem. That’s how mass surveillance works, if they brought it all in overnight, people would be appalled and be up in arms about it. What they do instead is gradually increase surveillance over a period of time, making every small step palatable by framing it “making you safer”, “protecting the children” and “beating crime” etc, and its drip drip drip, until one day you look up and realise you are deep in the plot of 1984 or some other dystopian nightmare. You have to resist from the start, by the time you have a problem, it’s way too late.

But already there's cctv on every corner watching us and you need id for many things

GarlicPint · 27/09/2025 06:28

Cheersmedears123 · 25/09/2025 16:41

I’m not keen and I don’t see how it would make any difference. If someone is employing people illegally then they will just continue to do so, surely?

Haven't rtft, I'm afraid.

The cops could pop into a local nail bar, barber shop, etc, and ask to see the employees' ID. They could scan it straight away and see if it's legit.

There is currently no facility for them to do anything remotely similar with an NI number.

rickyrickygrimes · 27/09/2025 06:45

childofthe607080s · 25/09/2025 16:29

How does it stop hidden working exactly? If someone is prepared to employ someone illegally sure they wil carry on?

Good question. It’s not digital or any type of ID that stops French employers employing illegal workers. It the frequent inspections from the minister du travail, it’s the huge fines if they are caught, it’s the heavy paper trail associated with working, it’s the lack of short term / casual work culture, it’s the influence of powerful unions opposed to the casualisation of work. But mostly it’s down to effective enforcement of labour laws. The UK is very ‘light touch’ by comparison, there is a much higher cultural acceptance of casual work. French employers are far more wary, as they would be breaking far more laws and facing much stronger enforcement.

So yes, the ID card won’t change this.

scalt · 27/09/2025 07:11

2020 is the reason I am very strongly opposed to digital ID. In an attempt to appear to be "beating the virus", the government brought in one absurd rule after another: rule of 6, no travelling between tiers, no buying non-essential stuff, no exercise for more than an hour (not an official rule, but everyone believed it), we might have to kill your cats, etc.

Most of this was unenforceable: the government knew it, and the public knew it. The system relied on people being sufficiently frightened to obey: and boy, did the government frighten the public. (That's an important difference between our government and others: people hold other countries up as a beacon of how we should have done it: stricter lockdowns, nothing open at all, fewer deaths, but none of those other countries frightened and infantilised their citizens as much as our government did.)

In the latter half, when we had the hugely expensive test-and-trace app, and the requirement to "check in" everywhere you went: as far as I am concerned, this was the dress rehearsal for a future digital ID, and has already made headway in softening us up for it. Nobody is saying anything about it now, because politicians are trying to pretend lockdown didn't really happen, and attention is being cunningly deflected towards "those immigrants stealing your work, doctors appointments, houses etc", but I do foresee that digital ID could be used to enforce things like lockdowns: not necessarily for a pandemic, but for a totally different cause, such as "we need to show we're doing something about climate change: quick, press the button so that people can no longer travel more than a mile to go shopping". By then, we'd be in the habit of "checking in" everywhere we go: shops, workplaces, and maybe even friends' houses, without even thinking about it, because we'd been nudged to accept it. Note the similarity with the ways lockdowns and digital IDs are being sold to us: to protect us from an external threat: the virus, and immigrants respectively. I do foresee our movement being restricted by our digital IDs to "protect" us from climate change: the seeds of fear of this have been sown for a long time. (Maybe climate change is a reality, but it's highly typical that the government would tinker round the edges to appear to be tackling it, like preventing people travelling for shopping, instead of the world targeting far more polluting causes.) And again, 15-minute cities is probably the warm-up for much bigger restrictions later. By then, the idea that digital ID was supposed to prevent "immigrants and small boats" would long be forgotten - perhaps from not preventing them.

Call me unrealistic, call me a tinfoil hatter, call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do foresee this kind of thing happening sooner than we think, and digital ID would be the first step towards making this a reality. Lots of people (including politicians) thought we could never have a lockdown: that's something other countries did. Then we did, and as the absurdity of benches being taped up to not being able to visit our dying relatives sunk in while Boris partied, we wondered "how did we get here?". This is why we must RESIST. An incidentally, lots of people probably thought Trump was bluffing when he talked about tariffs, and they would never happen. Those who voted for him are now seeing that he wasn't bluffing.

Yes, we do already have many systems which could be considered "oppressive to law-abiding people": widespread CCTV, and probably a lot of anti-terrorism legislation which theoretically allows people to be detained for a long time if the police "suspect" that they are a terrorist, with little or no evidence: it's just that we've moved on to a different scary buzzword, "immigration". Lockdown was enforced under the Public Health Act, rather than any new legislation, so the possibility was always there: it needed the public to be frightened enough to accept it. And yes, these systems could be utilised by a malevolent dictator Nigel Farage, on a whim. But what we don't want to do is to make it even easier for the government to oppress ordinary people, in the name of protecting us from some external "threat". This is why I think we need to be exceptionally careful about handing the government oppressive tools on a plate.

scalt · 27/09/2025 07:20

I will add that it's a good thing we are talking about this. This is an important difference from 2020, when we weren't allowed to talk about government oppression: anybody who tried to point out the harms of lockdowns was instantly shouted down with SHUT UP, YOU GRANNY KILLER, DON'T YOU CARE ABOUT PEOPLE DYING?, and silenced and de-platformed online. Although we're seeing some of the same insults, such as "conspiracy theorist" and "tinfoil hatter", those people are (for the moment) actually able to have their say, which they weren't in 2020.

kinkytoes · 27/09/2025 07:26

IdaGlossop · 25/09/2025 16:31

Some will but the government is getting tougher on malpractice and fines are substantial.

Really? Why are there so many empty kebab shops and barber shops and they keep on growing in number? Sitting ducks for an investigation but the government don't do jack.

rickyrickygrimes · 27/09/2025 08:13

So in France it’s not so much having an ID card that is the issue. The important thing is that your situation in France is ‘regular’ I.e. you meet whatever conditions have been put in place by the French state to be allowed to live / work / reside in France. I’m an immigrant to France, and I don’t have an ID card as only French nationals have these. But my situation is ‘regular’ and I can prove this.

Pre Brexit my British passport proved my right to be in France. Post Brexit I had to apply for a residence card / carte de séjour, which is now my proof of being allowed to enter France and start there.

For work I had to provide a copy of my passport and my carte de séjour before starting. If my employer was contrôlled ie inspected by the govt, and they couldn’t show that they had the correct documents for me, they would be in big trouble. Labour laws are taken very seriously here, unlike in the UK, which is very ‘light touch’ in terms of regulation.

Healthcare - it’s a different card, the carte vitale. It’s combined with my social security number as welfare benefits and healthcare are linked here. To get a carte vitale - again I needed to prove that my presence here is ‘regular’ ie legal. I had to provide birth certificate, marriage certificates (DH was working, I wasn’t), children’s birth certificates to include them, plus all DHs proof of work ie contract, payslips, letter from his employer - plus of course passports as ID. You can access healthcare without a carte vitale, but you won’t receive the government reimbursement. It’s needed everywhere - dr, specialist, hospitals for emergencies and routine ops, at the pharmacy for medication - everywhere. There are special cartes vitales for refugees. So everyone gets care - but to be ‘in the system’ you need to be able to prove that you are legally allowed to be.

Westfacing · 27/09/2025 08:28

Lullabycrickets23 · 26/09/2025 19:37

Where I originally come from, we always had Id cards. Now electronic ones. None of us feels our rights are undermined, why would they?

For me it's not about rights being undermined - it's about the pretence that this will stop illegal immigration, as that's what this PR stunt is trying to convince us.

Has ID in any way helped your country control migration?

It's just another layer of bureaucracy that won't improve our lives in any way.

OP posts:
YelloDaisy · 27/09/2025 13:08

RedRiverShore5 · 27/09/2025 06:05

How are they going to verify the IDs of those that haven't got passports, not everyone will know someone of good standing in the community or a business owner for two years

National insurance no, nhs number

EasternStandard · 27/09/2025 13:33

Yanbu it won’t do what Starmer proposes. A digital ID scheme is more effective on citizen behaviour.

EasternStandard · 27/09/2025 13:34

scalt · 27/09/2025 07:11

2020 is the reason I am very strongly opposed to digital ID. In an attempt to appear to be "beating the virus", the government brought in one absurd rule after another: rule of 6, no travelling between tiers, no buying non-essential stuff, no exercise for more than an hour (not an official rule, but everyone believed it), we might have to kill your cats, etc.

Most of this was unenforceable: the government knew it, and the public knew it. The system relied on people being sufficiently frightened to obey: and boy, did the government frighten the public. (That's an important difference between our government and others: people hold other countries up as a beacon of how we should have done it: stricter lockdowns, nothing open at all, fewer deaths, but none of those other countries frightened and infantilised their citizens as much as our government did.)

In the latter half, when we had the hugely expensive test-and-trace app, and the requirement to "check in" everywhere you went: as far as I am concerned, this was the dress rehearsal for a future digital ID, and has already made headway in softening us up for it. Nobody is saying anything about it now, because politicians are trying to pretend lockdown didn't really happen, and attention is being cunningly deflected towards "those immigrants stealing your work, doctors appointments, houses etc", but I do foresee that digital ID could be used to enforce things like lockdowns: not necessarily for a pandemic, but for a totally different cause, such as "we need to show we're doing something about climate change: quick, press the button so that people can no longer travel more than a mile to go shopping". By then, we'd be in the habit of "checking in" everywhere we go: shops, workplaces, and maybe even friends' houses, without even thinking about it, because we'd been nudged to accept it. Note the similarity with the ways lockdowns and digital IDs are being sold to us: to protect us from an external threat: the virus, and immigrants respectively. I do foresee our movement being restricted by our digital IDs to "protect" us from climate change: the seeds of fear of this have been sown for a long time. (Maybe climate change is a reality, but it's highly typical that the government would tinker round the edges to appear to be tackling it, like preventing people travelling for shopping, instead of the world targeting far more polluting causes.) And again, 15-minute cities is probably the warm-up for much bigger restrictions later. By then, the idea that digital ID was supposed to prevent "immigrants and small boats" would long be forgotten - perhaps from not preventing them.

Call me unrealistic, call me a tinfoil hatter, call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do foresee this kind of thing happening sooner than we think, and digital ID would be the first step towards making this a reality. Lots of people (including politicians) thought we could never have a lockdown: that's something other countries did. Then we did, and as the absurdity of benches being taped up to not being able to visit our dying relatives sunk in while Boris partied, we wondered "how did we get here?". This is why we must RESIST. An incidentally, lots of people probably thought Trump was bluffing when he talked about tariffs, and they would never happen. Those who voted for him are now seeing that he wasn't bluffing.

Yes, we do already have many systems which could be considered "oppressive to law-abiding people": widespread CCTV, and probably a lot of anti-terrorism legislation which theoretically allows people to be detained for a long time if the police "suspect" that they are a terrorist, with little or no evidence: it's just that we've moved on to a different scary buzzword, "immigration". Lockdown was enforced under the Public Health Act, rather than any new legislation, so the possibility was always there: it needed the public to be frightened enough to accept it. And yes, these systems could be utilised by a malevolent dictator Nigel Farage, on a whim. But what we don't want to do is to make it even easier for the government to oppress ordinary people, in the name of protecting us from some external "threat". This is why I think we need to be exceptionally careful about handing the government oppressive tools on a plate.

Yep

kinkytoes · 27/09/2025 14:28

YelloDaisy · 26/09/2025 18:51

I must live in some parallel universe to most mn users.

i use google maps when driving ( ells you if roadworks ahead) so google knows where i am. I log in to ebay or amazon or fb and they check my id, send a txt code to my phone number, so obviously know where i am. Many people have Alexa who listens in. I use chrome on my laptop so it knows a lot about me. The bank sends me txt confirmations-already knows my name and address.

yet somehow a digital id is some scary big brother spy risk -are you joking -the American tech cos know all about everybody. Get real.

You can't see how tech companies are different from your actual government?

kinkytoes · 27/09/2025 14:31

This govt is so incompetent anyway I really can't see them pulling this off successfully, even if they do decide to go ahead.

Valeriekat · 27/09/2025 15:42

mamagogo1 · 25/09/2025 16:31

Don’t think it will help that much with illegal immigration however I’d love an id card I can use for everything including European travel, if my drivers licence can be loaded onto it too and you can store it all on your phone, I’m most happy with that. I have nothing to hide

And when they start checking if you were the first to stop clapping for the beloved leader?