ID cards to be introduced. What do you feel. ?

[Fishingboatbobbingnight]

I have worked in serious organised crime for two decades. This is one of the best bits of news I have read in a long while. I have also been involved in ‘small boat’ arrivals. The reason people will by pass several safe EU countries to get to the UK is ‘I can get lost if I don’t get asylum’ ‘UK has no ID cards’ . It’s a no brainer .. why why has it taken so long. ? If you want to have the services your country has to offer - through most of the world - from healthcare to the library- you need to show you are a bona-fida citizen. However , for some unfathomable reason , the flag waving right wingers are always the one to oppose ..is it because they are scared it will work and leave their thinly veiled racism floundering ?

Yes to ID cards = YANBU
No to ID cards = YABU

Let's suppose for argument's sake that this is true of any particular hacker or faction. This doesn't address any of the potential cyberattacks that are done for the purpose of causing disorder. You must see that when people talk about safety, this is one of the main concerns.

Lived in Holland for 7 years - had to carry ID. Never bothered me.

Yes, I'm up for it 😊

…am I to assume that you don’t share any data, for fear of a Cyber attack ? No back account, driving licence, health record, sparks card etc etc etc.

A hacker can get a lot more about you from your Amazon account, than and Digital ID.

Why so angry? Is it a Labour thing where if they want it ok, but you’d not want the same scheme under Reform

Well, firstly because reform have been saying they’d do something similar and now suddenly everyone hates it? And because it just goes to show how thick society is these days

That’s a pretty strong post - you have just instructed almost 570,000 people to ‘grow up’.

That’s the number who have signed the Govt & Parliament petition, so far (and counting).

A family member works in a part of government focused on improving outcomes and access to services for some of the most disadvantaged people in society. He often bemoans the persistent challenges the govt faces with systems and services that are unable to communicate with each other. Legal constraints and incompatible architectures make linking data nearly impossible unless starting from scratch—something newer/more autocratic states with fewer legacy systems don’t struggle with as much.

Introducing a digital identity could be transformative. It would allow for services to be better connected and for targeted support, enabling more personalised and efficient delivery.

That said, I also recognise the deep-rooted philosophical resistance in this country to being reduced to a number—traceable, surveillable, and vulnerable to misuse by any future government with authoritarian tendencies. Our libertarian cultural heritage values privacy and autonomy, and rightly so.

Other countries seem to have approached this pragmatically. Many have implemented digital identity systems that enable seamless access to services while building public trust. And, future generations—born into a digital-first world—may not carry the same Orwellian fears of a surveillance state and its all pervasive control.
It’s also worth noting that private tech companies and banks already hold vast amounts of personal data, often with less oversight than governments. Most people share this data freely, often without realising the implications, and protections like GDPR are limited in scope.

I spoke with someone from Denmark today, where digital identity is universal and used for everything—even borrowing library books. There’s no opt-out, but what stood out was the transparency: citizens can see exactly who has accessed their data. That kind of accountability is essential for building trust and ensuring data is used responsibly.

Ultimately, I see both sides of the debate. The potential benefits are significant, but so are the risks—and any solution must be built with transparency, consent, and public trust at its core.

…and people do realise that the vast majority of “hacks” are from people giving their information to hackers in the first place ? Large scale successful intrusions into government systems, in the county, I’m not sure have ever happened.

I understand people have a moral objection (don’t have one myself), my objection is this notion that systems be hacked, and data is insecure, which is not the case.

Unlikely, as I don't have an Amazon account. And if I did, it would've been a choice.

The argument you're making about the private sector is flawed for multiple reasons. One is that you're not considering the greater collation and centralisation of data. A cyberattack on one part of the state at present is just that. Whereas if we have digital ID that's supposed to do lots of things and that's compulsory in some situations, that obviously has much more potential to cause chaos if interfered with. This is pretty bleeding obvious. Your concept of safety needs to include not just outside actors having access to data but what they can use this to do. There also isn't a mechanism by which it becomes fine to have a certain amount of interference with data controlled by the state because hey, M and S hack.

Okay? I stand by it and I’d say it to their faces.

You are not interesting enough for the government to track, unless you’re a criminal or the like.

Presumably, the vast majority signed the petition from their smartphones. Which will have their banking data, perhaps passport information, car insurance, NHS app, national insurance number etc on. The information already exists.

Everyone is speaking how other countries have IDs but surely a physical ID card is not the same as this digital ID that will probably be used to stalk our every step?

I might've watched Black Mirror too much but that's what keeps popping up in my head when I hear about these digital IDs.

Of course it’s anger from some of Labour’s scheme isn’t wanted. Good to see parties on both sides of Labour have come out against it.

570,000 signing it … BEFORE we have had any details of what it is, how it will be implemented etc … only shows me that 570,000 have jumped to conclusions based on half-truths, dog-whistles, misinformation, and the latest headline from the Daily Mail.

Sums up the problems with this county, people make their mind up based on misinformation, then spread it round like it’s fact.

Why?

You have already provided your motivation in your earlier post - it’s political. You are pro Labour, and anti-Reform.

It has nothing to do with immigration or current/future technology.

I know that Starmer cannot be honest, but the rest of us should try, please.

Labour introduced them before. It didn't work. It was scrapped and the trial cost the taxpayer £270 million or something crazy. This scheme is going to be in the range of billions of pounds, which right now we don't have.

Announce it when the economy is flying and there's spare cash knocking around. Right now it's madness.

Like I said. It just shows how thick society has become.

I presume the same people rallying against it won’t be going to Europe on their summer holidays

Oh nooooo, someone has a political opinion that doesn’t align with yours!

FWIW I don’t vote Labour and I disagree with them on a lot. I am, however, anti-reform and proud. But that’s irrelevant.

Pretty disrespectful to those who signed it, no?

I think what is dishonest, is Starmer’s stated rationale for ID cards.

…you really think that’s what will happen? That GCHQ will have banks of people stalking what Fred form Cirencester is having for his tea ?

Your mobile phone company knows exactly where you are anyway

How’s that disrespectful ? (Another over-used word there days, anytime you point flaws in someone’s “facts”)

If it cuts the grass underneath Reform's feet, I think it's a very small inconvenience for a high reward...

Then I have some unfortunate news for you. They're already politically capitalising on the golden opportunity Starmer has handed them. Farage has stated that the system won't tackle illegal migration. The opportunity for Reform to benefit will only grow as it becomes clearer that he was correct. He'll be able to lead them into the next GE on a platform of getting rid of the things entirely.

According to Harry Farley of the BBC:

"There has been a bit of confusion around who must have a digital ID under the government proposals.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told Radio 5 Live: "We're not envisaging for a moment that this will be mandatory.”

She added: “For UK citizens, it will be a choice and it'll be free for them to be able to access."

I’ve spoken to two people in government who have confirmed that is incorrect. It will be compulsory in order to work in the UK. So pensioners, for example, and others who are not working will not have to have one.

That is one way ministers are hoping to mitigate concerns around the elderly, and those who don’t have a smartphone, being excluded.

There are also questions around costs. A government source has confirmed that the cards will be free for all UK citizens and those who are legal residents in the UK."