Digital ID is Dead. Now What?
Another day another U-turn. It was only at the end of September that the Government claimed to be committed to mandatory digital right-to-work checks. Yet three short months later a Government source says that the compulsory element “was stopping conversation about what digital IDs could be used for generally”. Funny, that.
But now this impediment has been removed as the Government source claims, will the conversation proceed to a helpful conclusion? I doubt it. It’s stuck in an endless rehashing of clichés: ID ‘cards’, Chinese-style social credit system, a papers please society, a honey pot for hackers. The politics of digital ID are not sophisticated or even informed. The lack of a well thought through politics of digital ID cannot be blamed for the current mess. Guy de la Bédoyère’s account in the Daily Sceptic will be familiar to most of us, but could politics actually help? Having once again pressed the digital ID jack back into its box, we have an opportunity to improve our lot before it inevitably springs back into the national consciousness and we repeat the whole pantomime, yet again.
So, what position should those of us on the Right take? On what principles should we base that position? I believe it boils down to this: if we believe in property rights, then we need the means to prove ownership. The property in question is usually thought of in physical terms and the means of proof in that realm are well established. But what about the digital world? Those rights apply there too but the means to prove ownership are not well established and that puts those rights at risk. Less abstractly, there is only so far society can progress with a picture of a gas bill at its foundation. We need the means to prove our identity (and therefore ownership) in the digital realm not because it is mandated by a government that would just as soon have every one of us wearing multiple lanyards, but because it underpins the digital aspects of our society which we want to be fair, orderly and accountable. And we need it with, or preferably without, government.
The digital genie is not going back in the bottle. We need secure, convenient and reliable digital ID to ensure our digital lives remain part of a wider society that we all want, not a wild-West crime scape with frustrations at every turn. Ronald Reagan said the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”. So long as we leave digital ID in a mess, government will keep offering to help. And as this most recent episode demonstrated, what it calls help really is terrifying.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I read news from various sources throughout the world and I am increasingly hearing that people in other countries are seeing the UK as authoritarian and accelerating towards third world status. The latter is probably slightly over baked but the fact that people are saying these things shows that the UK is no longer a beacon of democracy. In my opinion this is due to government policy over the past 30 years.
“… third world status. The latter is probably slightly over baked…”
I don’t think so when most of the Third World lived here.
I was trying to be polite, you are probably right.
Not dead, only postponed.
They’re not giving up that easily.
No, not while the lying scumbag Blair is still alive and hoping to add to his fortune with a kickback from his Oracle mate.
Yes, they’re going to go down the coercion route …. effectively making it mandatory because it will be virtually impossible to live your life without it.
And yet purely commercial processes are almost there… For instance Barclaycard have a good fraud detection and prevention process. And using Barclaycard is voluntary.
Do we really need the Government to reinvent the identity processes? Or do we add a citizen ID to the various credit cards, debit cards, driving licences, passports, electoral roll etc. Enough to establish certainty of identity if needed without needing universal access.
No, we absolutely do not want the government inventing anything (it will be dreadfully designed, and full of security holes) we want to use services that do what is needed for us and that allow us to keep control of the secure tokens needed for these services to work, exchanging them with companies and services that we are happy with and refusing to allow the government to build a mobile prison where it can decide what we can do instead of it being part of transactional processes offered by companies whose services benefit us.
What’s the problem with just using national insurance numbers again? This has rumbled on and on and I can’t remember the issue with that. Anyone over 16 should have one, even a little plastic card for those of a certain vintage… that alongside a passport number should be more than enough for 99% of uses, as it’s always been.
The Labour government have simply taken a leaf out of Trumps book, by overstating a position, allowing a frenzy to ensue, only to re position to the point they wanted in the first place – and Bingo! The population are grateful!! Only, the reality is our citadel has been breached. Just as with the farmers being subjected to months of stress, only to be given the weakest of repreave, the Digital ID remains. Furthermore, whilst it is not mandated via government, every official action a British person will need to interact with, including banking, insurance, travel etc, will require ‘advanced security clearance’ or some such justification.
No, I’m afraid anyone who believes that Digital ID has been squashed – you’ve been played like a fiddle. Hitherto unthinkable levels of state interference will follow.
I fear you’re right.
Exactly, and the same goes for all the other apparent “U-turns” the Stalinist government have made, including jury trials.
As the much-maligned David Icke said years ago, it’s
“The Totalitarian Two-Step: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back”
Over stating your case, and then rowing back to what you really wanted is just basic negotiation technique. Trump is good at it. Business people are good at it.
Yep. Exactly.
Agreed – we’ve all been watching the right hand while the left hand has been up to no good… chipping away at it
I agree with you, but would say it’s not just a Trump thing* and has been the case for many years: I call it the “ex post facto” strategy. By the time there’s a frenzy about it, it’s already a done deal and has been road-tested and implemented for a while.
Same could be said of the worst, most pernicious aspects of AI (there are many very good and useful aspects). Not new, military & intelligence have used on/with us for awhile. By the time it becomes widespread and front-facing, the “controversies” are predictable and being steered. Meanwhile, investors benefit — and (sometimes) are among those decrying the technology in public. They “doth protest too much” right before the sale/bubble burst, as they “sell high”.
*I’m American
Nah. He’s just restin’.
…said Michael Palin. Legendary Python sketch.
I would suggest we need something that is linked to our name, date and place of birth, NI number and current address and encrypted (by us) using Blockchain technology.
With this we could have total control of our digital ID, and we could then use this to do things like online voting in elections and referendums, and get rid of the antiquated and corruptible existing system. If you have voted, your vote is registered and cannot be altered without our knowledge.
Your digital ID would be unique to you, and only you, and would be created by you, and controlled by you, using a password/pin only you know, possibly using Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) linked to email, mobile, text or whatever.
Clearly, not everyone would be able or willing to use this (not mandatory), those without access to a phone/tablet/laptop would need an alternative system, via phone or in person using driving license and/or passport.
As the author stated, we need a dependable and safe means of identifying ourselves in the digital world (love or hate it), free from government or official control.
online voting in elections and referendums, and get rid of the antiquated and corruptible existing system.
Really? And how well has this worked out in the US with massive voter fraud via the machines? The only corruptible element in our elections is the unnecessary postal votes for all that falls perfectly for the muslims to vote en bloc.
Never said it would be easy, but it should be possible and be infallible, as long as the “authorities” are not involved.
What’s corruptible about a cross on a piece of paper?
There is a corruptible part, which should be stopped, and that is postal voting, unless armed forces.
100% – should be an absolute exceptional process only
I already have complete control of my digital ID.
Passport, driving licence, bank account, debit card, store cards, NI Number, tax reference number, utilities accounts, and access to various websites for shopping, information, leisure.
What else do I need?
I’m a small state person and suspicious and opposed to government overreach so I am against compulsory digital ID. I can see the potential advantages of having a card / app that confirms identity digitally and that some people may voluntarily wish to obtain one to make their lives (seem?) a little easier / quicker for everyday transactions; however, it must be entirely voluntary and wouldn’t be for me. The arguments around ID seem to broadly be about expediency and fraud prevention (banking and money transactions, employment eligibility, immigration status and so forth). This seems to be putting the horse before the cart. If the law was enforced more vigorously and the penalties for fraud were far more severe, then this would naturally reduce financial, employment (and immigration) fraud. What’s the point in deploying compulsory ID cards to find and prosecute more fraud if the perpetrators are let off completely or subject to joke sentencing? Unfortunately, there are evil polticians that would let the use compulsory IDs evolve for nefarious means; however, the UK is fortunate that Starmer is such an honourable, trustworthy, irreproachable and upstanding chap – with the best interests of the people at heart – so it… Read more »
Fraud prevention. The main problem here are the idiots who make it easier for the fraudsters, eg:handing over passwords, responding to messages telling them they have won £millions in a lottery they hadn’t entered.
There is no way of making anything fool-proof when there is no shortage of fools in the population.
And how exactly are penalties enforced more vigorously and made more severe when most of the fraudsters are outside the UK?
It depends what they mean by “Digital ID”. After all, we already have a list of them, such as an NI number, a passport number (and a photographic image), local council number, an NHS patient number, and many more. If the plan is to consolidate them all into one overarching Department that grants one a unique number that all organisations have to use, that could cause all sorts of problems when it goes wrong. E.g. what would happeneif one is officially dead? All accounts closed at the drop of a hat?
Not dead. See what I posted earlier, stolen from Lockdown Sceptics subreddit. From June Slater Facebook page. Digital ID is not going anywhere. “Digital ID From a lawyer in our WhatsApp group 👇👇👇 Below is a plain-English, between-the-lines reading of the Telegraph article, translating the political language into what it actually signals. The short answer is: digital ID is not being abandoned at all — only the word “compulsory” is being softened, for now. ⸻ Headline vs reality: what’s really changed? Headline claim: “Keir Starmer abandons plans for compulsory digital ID” Reality: The government has abandoned immediate compulsion — not the system, not the infrastructure, and not the policy direction. This is a tactical retreat, not a strategic reversal. ⸻ The key sleight of hand: “optional” ≠ voluntary in practice The article repeatedly says digital ID will be “optional”, but then quietly explains that: • Right-to-work checks remain mandatory • Digital ID will be automatically checked against a central database • Employers will still be legally obliged to verify status • A consultation will decide which verification methods are acceptable Translation: You may not be forced to download the app on day one — but the system you must pass… Read more »
I can’t decide if this issue being reported/opined on by an anonymous author is appropriately ironic.
I’m not sure you are thinking hard enough about this. Digital ID? The concept to me is effable.
Ten steps forward, two inches back then pretend you’ve ‘had a re-think’ and ‘listened’. Where else have we just seen this same pantomime? Ah yes, the farm tax.
If you think “digital ID is dead” I’ve got a vaccine against a Chinese/US/UK manufactured cold virus to flog you.
But they’re not “dead”.
They will be “voluntary” in the same way covid vaccination was voluntary.
You dont need one but you’ll be cut off from society if you don’t get one
It’s not “dead” unless the infrastructure they are creating is destroyed, anything less is just a tactical withdrawal.
I understand your idea, however fail to see how this digital ID would work and not be open to hacking. Not having the government involved may help in reducing the scope for control, however I think control could still be a risk. Furthermore it all falls flat if electricity or internet fails.
So where no system is perfect, the scale for problems when using digital ID is so much bigger.