The UK government has modified its plans for a digital identification system, shifting from a mandatory model to an optional one for employees. This decision comes after public support for the initiative plummeted from 53% in June to just 31% following Labour leader Keir Starmer‘s announcement in October 2023. Under the original proposal, individuals would have been required to obtain a digital ID to prove their right to work by 2029, but now, while right-to-work checks will transition online, participation in the government’s digital ID scheme will be voluntary.
Privacy advocates have hailed the government’s reversal, emphasizing the potential risks of mandatory digital IDs that could further marginalize vulnerable populations, particularly the homeless. Jasleen Chaggar, legal and policy officer at Big Brother Watch, expressed strong support for the decision, stating, “In this country, we’ve never had to have any kind of government-validated permit to exist.” Chaggar asserted that homeless individuals have the right to live without being compelled to obtain a government-issued document to access essential services.
While the government maintains that digital IDs could simplify interactions with state services and financial institutions, experts in the homelessness sector express skepticism about the practicality of such a system. Matt Downie, chief executive of Crisis, pointed out that many homeless individuals lack access to smartphones and reliable internet. He highlighted that these barriers could hinder their ability to benefit from any proposed digital ID system.
According to the Digital Poverty Alliance (DPA), nearly 4.5 million adults in the UK do not own a smartphone, raising significant concerns about the accessibility of the digital ID proposal. Downie noted that many of the people they assist face challenges such as unreliable internet access or lost devices, which are common issues for individuals experiencing homelessness.
Despite the government’s assurances that participation in the digital ID scheme is voluntary, Chaggar warned that the normalization of the digital ID could create unintentional pressure for individuals to comply. She cited examples from other countries, such as India, where ostensibly voluntary systems have become essential for everyday activities, raising concerns about coercion through normalization.
In response to the controversy, Chancellor Rachel Reeves attempted to downplay the situation, stating, “We are saying that you will need mandatory digital ID to be able to work in the UK. Now the difference is whether that has to be one piece of ID, a digital ID card, or whether it could be an e-visa or an e-passport.” Reeves emphasized that the government is flexible regarding the form of identification required.
Nevertheless, civil liberties organizations remain cautious. Akiko Hart, director of Liberty, welcomed the shift away from compulsory digital IDs but stressed the need for a system that is truly voluntary and inclusive. She stated, “If the government wants to build a digital ID system fit for the 21st century, it must be voluntary, inclusive, and genuinely rights-respecting.” Hart called for strong protections against data centralization, surveillance, and cyber threats, emphasizing that any digital ID system should empower individuals to access vital services while safeguarding their rights.
As the debate around digital identification continues, stakeholders from various sectors are urging the government to consider the implications of this system on some of the most vulnerable members of society. The conversation around ensuring access, privacy, and the fundamental rights of individuals remains a priority as the UK navigates this technological shift.
