Should we have a universal ID card?

[Bletchleyite]

Looking at what has been stated by the PM. Nobody will be stopped in the street and required to produce this ID. The initial use will be to prove entitlement to work.

Home Office raids on places of work already exist. Will anybody be required to produce this ID while at work ?

Requiring people to produce it when they've been copped riding an illegal "e-bike" with a Deliveroo box on the back would be something I would hope would happen, personally, if for no other reason than it'd help get rid of these typically incredibly antisocial "cyclists" (and non-taxpaying, illegal workers) from the roads fairly quickly.

 

[Ted633]

Work will already have your NI number and will have done the checks prior to giving you employment. So what's the point of it?

See post #275 on page 10

 

[Terry Tibbs]

I just don’t see the point in any of this.

A new requirement to show a digital ID card to prove an individual can legally work is zero disincentive to someone who wants to work illegally or ‘employ’ someone illegally.

You could say that everyone needs to wear red socks as proof they can work legally, but it doesn’t mean every employer will check job applicants wear red socks.

I hardly think those dreadful criminal enterprises who exploit illegal workers will be quaking in their boots after this announcement!

The recent Polish election saw digital ID cards for a great many Poles ‘fail’ on election day with the result that these people were unable to vote. Food for thought….be careful what you wish for.

 

[Sorcerer]

So what it effectively is is a work permit, not an ID card. I bet if they'd called it that there'd be less pushback.

Very typical of the current Labour government to attempt to deliver a policy while selling it in the most awful way possible. The only way it could've been worse is if they had Peter Kyle on live national television proudly proclaiming that anyone who doesn't support it are on the side of human traffickers.

 

[muz379]

Fundamentally I really do not think this is going to happen, at least not as a mandatory thing that is required for right to work checks. The opposition to this is fairly universal from all sides of politics and those in between.

But how does a national Digital ID system do either of those things?

It's easy to throw out soundbites, "oh it'll stop people working illegally". Yes, but how? How will it do that? And how will it do that in a way that other, much less intrusive, methods can't? I have a passport which proves my right to be in the UK. It has a chip in it which can be verified. My employer checks that passport. If they don't, they might get fined. Legitimate employers will care about that. Illegitimate employers, well, won't. So what does a Digital ID do differently?

To be fair proving right to work with a passport is straightforward and makes sense because it is also a photographic ID. But if the prospective employee doesn't have a passport then right to work checks rely on other forms of ID like birth certificates which are much harder to tie to a specific individual.

Not saying this as an advocate for this idea or certainly not for it to be mandatory, I wouldn't be particularly opposed if it was developed as a completely optional scheme for proof of right to work for those that dont have a passport and have no interest/intention of getting one.

Home Office raids on places of work already exist. Will anybody be required to produce this ID while at work ?

I guess if there was a raid on the place of work and the officers had reasonable grounds to suspect you of not having the right to work they could ask just as they can ask now for you to provide ID.

Work will already have your NI number and will have done the checks prior to giving you employment. So what's the point of it?

I suspect the idea will be that this will replace the current right to work checks and you will just show or share this digital ID when being offered a job.
There is as far as I have seen no mention of if a check for this ID will also need to be carried out on existing employees.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The recent scandal around forced disconnection and imposition of prepaid meters for non-payment had nothing to do with the type of meter in use.

That’s not true.

To either disconnect or replace a traditional meter a Court order was required, and to get that Court order they had to prove that they’d taken steps to ensure there were no vulnerabilities.

But smart meters could just be turned off remotely. No courts. Nobody checking they’d followed the rules.

Bizarrely, this meant that utility companies didn’t bother checking for vulnerabilities and just did what they wanted. Who could have foreseen such a thing? Certainly not those of us working in the debt advice sector.

Variable pricing is an opt in feature, which many people consider useful when they have the means to take advantage of it. Anyone else can have the same generic single fixed price / economy 7 tariff as they had before (huh - who knew cheap off peak electricity existed before smart meters?!!)

Differential electricity pricing has been a thing that power companies have offered for decades, far before any smart meters existed, it's not a smart meter invention.

We’re not talking about Economy 7, though, we’re talking about dynamic pricing. Something the government specifically said they would not do when they started pushing smart meters. Yet here we are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We’re not talking about Economy 7, though, we’re talking about dynamic pricing. Something the government specifically said they would not do when they started pushing smart meters. Yet here we are.

One supplier (Octopus) is doing that only for people who specifically choose that tariff. You don't have to choose Octopus nor that tariff. That's like saying Advance tickets should be abolished because you don't like them.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I wouldn't be particularly opposed if it was developed as a completely optional scheme for proof of right to work for those that dont have a passport and have no interest/intention of getting one.

The reason why most people don’t have a passport is because of the cost.

So the Brains Trust at Labour are going to spend billions developing a digital passport that nobody wants, instead of a much simpler solution: give people free passports.

But where would the fun in that be?

The only thing that gives me any comfort is that the system will no doubt be developed by Fujitsu and so I’ll just be able to let myself into the system and make it say whatever I want it to.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Sep 2025 ==

One supplier (Octopus) is doing that only for people who specifically choose that tariff. That's like saying Advance tickets should be abolished because you don't like them.

No.

It’s like saying LNER shouldn’t be allowed to abolish regulated off peak fares and force everyone on to Advance tickets because they government had previously promised not to.

They said they wouldn’t charge people more at peak times. Now they’re charging people more at peak times. It goes to show that any promises made about this Digital ID scheme are worthless.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The reason why most people don’t have a passport is because of the cost.

So the Brains Trust at Labour are going to spend billions developing a digital passport that nobody wants, instead of a much simpler solution: give people free passports.

Passports are an inconvenient format for carrying. The EU countries have in my view got it right with a credit card format card.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Passports are an inconvenient format for carrying

So inconvenient that we all manage to carry them in our pockets when we go on holiday.

The Digital ID card is supposedly going to be for right to work checks. They are checks that happen once- when you start work. So why would portability matter?

At best, the whole thing is a solution looking for a problem. Still, a good way to funnel cash to the techbros who are funding the right wing Labour think tanks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So inconvenient that we all manage to carry them in our pockets when we go on holiday.

The Digital ID card is supposedly going to be for right to work checks. They are checks that happen once- when you start work. So why would portability matter?

Because carrying ID is useful.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Because carrying ID is useful.

Is it?

In my day to day life I don’t ever need to show ID. The only time I ever show ID is when I’m flying somewhere. And I have my driving licence or my passport for that, depending on where I’m going.

Forcing people to carry ID might be useful for the papers please types that the UK government seems to be full of. But that’s something very different.

 

[Razorblades]

What did the acting PM say about the self-employed? I won't be coerced into this nonsense, and I will be relatively flippant if a contracting job from a loyal customer were to come with these strings attached. I've got plenty of ID and a birth certificate proving I'm an Englishman, so none of this claptrap need apply to me. Cobblers, the lot of it.

Problem (Migration) - Reaction (Flag-raisers) - Solution (Digital ID). Textbook.

 

[Gourlish]

I think people currently have to either use a passport or a combination of a birth certificate and National Insurance sheet to prove the right to work (driving licences are not sufficient proof because they do not prove citizenship even though they are valid ID for most other purposes).

Most British people will have a birth certificate and proof of their National Insurance number unless either has been destroyed, but not everyone has a valid passport, which is often the preferred option of many employers.

My personal view would be that the passport should serve little purpose other than to travel abroad, and that other more portable forms of ID should exist for domestic purposes. T

The driving licence serves this de-facto purpose for most things, but not for proving the right to work, whereas a national ID card (physical or digital) would.

Many countries in Europe with otherwise liberal reputations including the Netherlands and Germany have national ID cards, and Ireland now has a de-facto ID card although I don't think requires possession at all times.

The UK, Denmark, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are unusual among developed countries in that they currently don't (many US states will issue ID cards for those who do not/cannot drive, which are otherwise basically the same as US driver's licenses).

 

[sor]

That’s not true.

To either disconnect or replace a traditional meter a Court order was required, and to get that Court order they had to prove that they’d taken steps to ensure there were no vulnerabilities.

But smart meters could just be turned off remotely. No courts. Nobody checking they’d followed the rules.

Bizarrely, this meant that utility companies didn’t bother checking for vulnerabilities and just did what they wanted. Who could have foreseen such a thing? Certainly not those of us working in the debt advice sector.

That is true. From Citizens Advice themselves: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...-ofgems-announcement-on-compensation-for-ppm/

“The prepayment meter scandal must never be allowed to be repeated. As energy bills soared, suppliers broke into homes with no warning to force installation of prepayment meters, while those with smart meters were remotely switched to prepayment mode. It resulted in tens of thousands of people unable to afford to keep their meters topped up, often with devastating consequences.

We’re not talking about Economy 7, though, we’re talking about dynamic pricing. Something the government specifically said they would not do when they started pushing smart meters. Yet here we are.

But we are for the vast majority of people who have not specifically opted in to a dynamically priced tariff. Octopus is mentioned. I am with Octopus. I have a smart meter. I have economy 7. The only "variable pricing" I receive is when Octopus advertises periods of totally free electricity, usually when renewables are working at full tilt. Otherwise, the price I pay is identical to those without a smart meter.

So inconvenient that we all manage to carry them in our pockets when we go on holiday.

The Digital ID card is supposedly going to be for right to work checks. They are checks that happen once- when you start work. So why would portability matter?

At best, the whole thing is a solution looking for a problem. Still, a good way to funnel cash to the techbros who are funding the right wing Labour think tanks.

I doubt this will be useful for travel. I wish it were, because carrying a passport is genuinely inconvenient. Especially in those countries where - unlike the UK's proposal - it actually is law to carry a form of photo ID, and post-Brexit our driving licences are no longer valid for that purpose.

 

[Kite159]

..

Requiring people to produce it when they've been copped riding an illegal "e-bike" with a Deliveroo box on the back would be something I would hope would happen, personally, if for no other reason than it'd help get rid of these typically incredibly antisocial "cyclists" (and non-taxpaying, illegal workers) from the roads fairly quickly.

That would mean the police actually doing some work at tackling the surge of anti social cyclists

 

[Gourlish]

I think people in Russia (this was also the case in the former Soviet Union) are expected to show internal passports just to board a train. The internal passport is essentially a national identity card but in a rather inconvenient form that resembles an actual passport that can be used for international travel. I think the Soviet Union placed controls on movement around the country and these were used for that purpose so that an official in, say, Vladivostok, could stamp the internal passport of a traveller from Moscow. As far as I know modern Russia doesn't have quite the same controls on internal movement but they've retained the Soviet style internal passports, possibly for nostalgic reasons.

As for New Labour's ID cards they would have made it easier for British nationals to travel to Europe prior to Brexit. Most people in the UK needed passports to travel to Europe, whereas people from France and many other EU countries could simply show their EU-compliant ID cards to enter the UK. From what I've read the proposed British ID card would have been valid in the same way for entering France, Belgium or the Netherlands, and I think because a few were issued in around early 2010, pre-2020 government documents stated that they were valid for travelling to the continent.

 

[nanstallon]

1. The British can't do anything involving technology without making a mess of it.
2. Give the police any powers and they will misuse them.
So - no.

 

[berneyarms]

I think people currently have to either use a passport or a combination of a birth certificate and National Insurance sheet to prove the right to work (driving licences are not sufficient proof because they do not prove citizenship even though they are valid ID for most other purposes). Most British people will have a birth certificate and proof of their National Insurance number unless either has been destroyed, but not everyone has a valid passport, which is often the preferred option of many employers. My personal view would be that the passport should serve little purpose other than to travel abroad, and that other more portable forms of ID should exist for domestic purposes. The driving licence serves this de-facto purpose for most things, but not for proving the right to work, whereas a national ID card (physical or digital) would.

Many countries in Europe with otherwise liberal reputations including the Netherlands and Germany have national ID cards, and Ireland now has a de-facto ID card although I don't think requires possession at all times. The UK, Denmark, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are unusual among developed countries in that they currently don't (many US states will issue ID cards for those who do not/cannot drive, which are otherwise basically the same as US driver's licenses).

Ireland does NOT have a de facto ID card as I already posted.

It is a passport card issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs, and signing up for it is entirely voluntary, and you have to pay extra to get it.

It only contains the information that a passport holds - nothing else.

 

[Bikeman78]

..

That would mean the police actually doing some work at tackling the surge of anti social cyclists

Quite. They could deal with the problem tomorrow if they wanted. I wonder where such people might hang out. Maybe fast food outlets? Not hard to nab them as they walk out of the door is it?

 

[danm14]

Ireland now has a de-facto ID card although I don't think requires possession at all times.

Ireland's Public Services Card is only mandatory to claim social welfare benefits, and doubles as a Free Travel Pass for those entitled to Free Travel.

Some online Government services, such as applying for a driving licence online, are only available to holders - but there is always an alternative (which may admittedly sometimes be quite inconvenient) that doesn't require one.

There was a brief period where you could not apply for a passport or driving licence at all without one, but this is no longer the case.

It is not mandatory to carry, except insofar as someone with Free Travel needs to carry it to exercise that entitlement.

There are still an astronomically large number of working-age adults who do not have one, are not required to get one, and probably won't get one until pension age.

It is not accepted as a form of ID in most circumstances outside of interactions with the State, in fact its acceptance by non-State bodies is actually a criminal offence.

 

[brad465]

Quite. They could deal with the problem tomorrow if they wanted. I wonder where such people might hang out. Maybe fast food outlets? Not hard to nab them as they walk out of the door is it?

I've got a better way of dealing with them, shut down the gig economy delivery industry entirely. Ignoring whether or not the people working for it are legitimate, it's an industry that fuels obesity, laziness among customers and reduces disposable income for more meaningful parts of the economy, to name a few. Significantly reducing the number of illegal works and/or dangerous/careless cycling behaviour is a bonus.

What did the acting PM say about the self-employed? I won't be coerced into this nonsense, and I will be relatively flippant if a contracting job from a loyal customer were to come with these strings attached. I've got plenty of ID and a birth certificate proving I'm an Englishman, so none of this claptrap need apply to me. Cobblers, the lot of it.

Problem (Migration) - Reaction (Flag-raisers) - Solution (Digital ID). Textbook.

A big problem with solving a lot of society's problems is that while getting agreement on the existence of a problem is easy, getting agreement on the solutions is next to impossible. Everyone bases their "solutions" on emotions, not evidence, and are almost always supposedly simple. ID cards won't solve everything on their own, but they are also not a simple solution, as their rollout and management is very complex.

 

[GusB]

I'm in two minds about this. On one hand, I can appreciate that there's a need for some form of ID that isn't a passport or photo driving licence; when I applied for my last job they were presented as the only options I had. This was a company policy rather than official government policy.

The government says:

Prove your right to work to an employer

Find out how to prove your right to work in the UK to an employer. Get an online share code to prove your right to work if you’re eligible or check what documents you can use instead.

www.gov.uk

If you’re a British or Irish citizen​

If you’re a British or Irish citizen, you can prove your right to work in the UK with either of the following:

• a British passport
• an Irish passport or passport card

Your passport or passport card can be current or expired.

If you do not have a passport or passport card, you can prove your right to work with one of the following:

• a UK birth or adoption certificate
• an Irish birth or adoption certificate
• a certificate of registration or naturalisation as a British citizen

You must also give your employer an official letter or document from a previous employer or a government agency.

For example, you could use a letter from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) or the Social Security Agency in Northern Ireland.

The letter must show your name and National Insurance number.

I've never had a full passport and my driving licence is non-photographic. My employer eventually agreed that it could employ me with the identification that I had (birth certificate and paperwork showing my NI number), but it took a fair bit of to-ing and fro-ing between my boss and head office before they accepted my documentation.

I don't mind having an official ID card to prove who I am, but it should be provided free-of-charge to anyone who is required to have one.

Requiring people to produce it when they've been copped riding an illegal "e-bike" with a Deliveroo box on the back would be something I would hope would happen, personally, if for no other reason than it'd help get rid of these typically incredibly antisocial "cyclists" (and non-taxpaying, illegal workers) from the roads fairly quickly.

If you're going to require certain people to produce documentation on demand, surely you must be prepared to do the same. I always thought that you were against the idea of "papers please", but it seems that you don't care as long as it only affects those who you deem to be anti-social.

 

[Cdd89]

The thing I find frustrating is that Apple already has a model for adding a driving license to Apple Wallet - something the government could have got on board with, which would have been optional, internationally compliant and widely popular.

Instead we have the Britcard proposal, a wallet like an Apple Wallet (but not an Apple wallet ), which won't be compatible and reminds me of Gov.UK's attempt to build their own Covid app that shunned Apple/Google's built in functionality. It's a strange form of British exceptionalism.

Undoubtedly digital ID obviously won't happen in any form, such is the terrible scary messaging on this topic and the ferocity of the opposition. What I lament is that, thanks to this messaging, we are now back to 2005 levels of hostility toward digitisation and we won't even get the benign basics like not having to carry a plastic card around everywhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Sep 2025 ==

Being able to prove your age online by way of a simple integration with the Government site is certainly something I would trust with my data far more than the random, sometimes disreputable companies doing it at present, to be honest. This does seem a good use-case for it.

The current age verification processes required by the Online Safety Act are pretty loose, merely requiring evidence the user is probably over 18. (Eg: account age, physical appearance, etc).

Checking a government database would make the the Act even more of an overreach than it already is. I would trust a dubious website with a selfie or a credit card sooner than I trusted it with a link to my government identity. (In my opinion, this would even be the case if the government check were privacy-forward or anonymised in some way). It's also likely unworkable since visitors to the UK would be unable to use it to verify.

 

[DoubleLemon]

I just don’t see the point in any of this. A new requirement to show a digital ID card to prove an individual can legally work is zero disincentive to someone who wants to work illegally or ‘employ’ someone illegally. You could say that everyone needs to wear red socks as proof they can work legally but it doesn’t mean every employer will check job applicants wear red socks. I hardly think those dreadful criminal enterprises who exploit illegal workers will be quaking in their booits after this announcement!
The recent Polish election saw digital ID cards for a great many Poles ‘fail’ on election day with the result that these people were unable to vote. Food for thought….be careful what you wish for.

you think this is just a slot in replacement for the current system.
there's no live check of the current system and it's hard to enforce.
.
I am pretty sure payroll software will be updated to check the status of the worker from the key generated by the ID token provided to the employer live. this would then stop them being run in payroll and make hmrc aware.

this would solve a lot of the problem as unless it's a small business where they keep paying cash in hand gig workers would not get paid as it is always going to be electronic payments. so just eat etc will have no choice but to comply. payroll and other software will make sure of that.

while not a 100% solution it's a huge improvement. it only works however if everyone has a the id.

there's the common problem of people being matched to the wrong person because the id we currently provide can match multiple people in certain circumstances

happens regularly in payroll and things like attachment of earnings being associated with the wrong person as the agency only keeps the customer data that when sent to hmrc for them to apply the attachment matches a number of people. there's nothing guaranteed to be unique. while it's not coomon it happens regularly enough.

people open bank accounts and get loans / credit using other people's documents all the time as its not cross checked and it's not verified and can be abused.

a single token generated for each organisation as needed should reduce these issues

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Sep 2025 ==

The thing I find frustrating is that Apple already has a model for adding a driving license to Apple Wallet - something the government could have got on board with, which would have been optional, internationally compliant and widely popular.

Instead we have the Britcard proposal, a wallet like an Apple Wallet (but not an Apple wallet ), which won't be compatible and reminds me of Gov.UK's attempt to build their own Covid app that shunned Apple/Google's built in functionality. It's a strange form of British exceptionalism.

Undoubtedly digital ID obviously won't happen in any form, such is the terrible scary messaging on this topic and the ferocity of the opposition. What I lament is that, thanks to this messaging, we are now back to 2005 levels of hostility toward digitisation and we won't even get the benign basics like not having to carry a plastic card around everywhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Sep 2025 ==


The current age verification processes required by the Online Safety Act are pretty loose, merely requiring evidence the user is probably over 18. (Eg: account age, physical appearance, etc).

Checking a government database would make the the Act even more of an overreach than it already is. I would trust a dubious website with a selfie or a credit card sooner than I trusted it with a link to my government identity. (In my opinion, this would even be the case if the government check were privacy-forward or anonymised in some way). It's also likely unworkable since visitors to the UK would be unable to use it to verify.

the online safety act is stupid. it's parents who should take responsibility for what their kids do online. thees have been tools available for a long time. but it's always someone else's fault.

you get your car and dvla information recorded and checked automatically via anpr online.


smartphones have secured areas to store local encrypted data. but a driving licence does not tell me if you can work in the Uk or you have overstayed your visa. it doesn't even tell me you are legally allowed to drive as you may have been disqualified and using it anyway.

 

[stadler]

I think people in Russia (this was also the case in the former Soviet Union) are expected to show internal passports just to board a train. The internal passport is essentially a national identity card but in a rather inconvenient form that resembles an actual passport that can be used for international travel. I think the Soviet Union placed controls on movement around the country and these were used for that purpose so that an official in, say, Vladivostok, could stamp the internal passport of a traveller from Moscow. As far as I know modern Russia doesn't have quite the same controls on internal movement but they've retained the Soviet style internal passports, possibly for nostalgic reasons.

As for New Labour's ID cards they would have made it easier for British nationals to travel to Europe prior to Brexit. Most people in the UK needed passports to travel to Europe, whereas people from France and many other EU countries could simply show their EU-compliant ID cards to enter the UK. From what I've read the proposed British ID card would have been valid in the same way for entering France, Belgium or the Netherlands, and I think because a few were issued in around early 2010, pre-2020 government documents stated that they were valid for travelling to the continent.

Russia only requires you to show a passport when purchasing a ticket for a long distance intercity train and when boarding a long distance intercity train. It solely applies to long distance intercity and sleeper trains. It does not apply to the suburban and regional Elektrichka trains. You could travel all the way from Moscow to Vladivostok without showing any ID if you went entirely by local Elektrichka trains.

The purpose of this in modern times is solely to stop third parties from buying up tickets and reselling them. There used to be a major issue of this happening back when Russia was less strict on this. The rules were relaxed on this after the USSR disbanded but then tightened up again. So they check when boarding to ensure that the ticket is only used by the person named on it. You have the choice of showing either a Russian internal passport or a Russian international passport. It does not have to be the internal one. Of course foreigners can simply show their foreign passports.

The use of internal passports is an odd thing. Russia and Turkmenistan are the only two countries to still retain internal passports to this day. The odd thing is that most people in Russia also have an international passport (they heavily discount it when you renew both and encourage you to get both and as a result most people just decide to get both the internal and international books even if they do not plan to go overseas) so it seems odd to have both. You might as well just scrap the internal passport and use the international passport for everything. You have the weird situation of most people in Russia owning two different passport books.

Ireland does NOT have a de facto ID card as I already posted.

It is a passport card issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs, and signing up for it is entirely voluntary, and you have to pay extra to get it.

It only contains the information that a passport holds - nothing else.

Well it depends on how you define an ID card. The passport card that Ireland issues is a government issued card (the same size as an ID card and looks like an ID card) and can be used for identification. So i think many would call it an ID card even if that is not the official term.

The issuance of passport cards is something unique to Ireland and USA only. It seems like they created it as a simple way to do ID cards without launching a brand new ID card scheme. Many other countries with ID cards are optional and cost money so those points alone do not mean that it is not an ID card.

I'm in two minds about this. On one hand, I can appreciate that there's a need for some form of ID that isn't a passport or photo driving licence; when I applied for my last job they were presented as the only options I had. This was a company policy rather than official government policy.

The government says:

Prove your right to work to an employer

Find out how to prove your right to work in the UK to an employer. Get an online share code to prove your right to work if you’re eligible or check what documents you can use instead.

www.gov.uk

I've never had a full passport and my driving licence is non-photographic. My employer eventually agreed that it could employ me with the identification that I had (birth certificate and paperwork showing my NI number), but it took a fair bit of to-ing and fro-ing between my boss and head office before they accepted my documentation.

I don't mind having an official ID card to prove who I am, but it should be provided free-of-charge to anyone who is required to have one.


If you're going to require certain people to produce documentation on demand, surely you must be prepared to do the same. I always thought that you were against the idea of "papers please", but it seems that you don't care as long as it only affects those who you deem to be anti-social.

I too still have a paper driving licence so i doubt many would accept this as identification. Luckily i have always held a passport but i imagine that there must be a considerable amount of other people that still have paper driving licences and do not have a passport. So it is a good point that a lot of people have no identification that is widely accepted by employers.

What i have always proposed is that passports should be made free of charge. That would mean that every person could easily have a universally acceptable form of ID (a passport is the most widely accepted identification) with no cost to them and it would not require the creation of any new ID card system. Surely that would be the simplest method and would not have all the controversy and issues that creating a new ID card or digital ID would have.

 

[davews]

They seem to be concentrating on its use for right to work reasons and if it is just for that it is pretty useless for many of us. Now long retired so won't be seeking a job. But is this requirement to prove your ID etc for employment relatively new? When I took up what turned out to be a job for life in 1971 (with Ferranti, remember them?) I don't recall ever having to prove who I was, I was just a new graduate looking for a job who obviously looked British. I didn't have passport or driving licence in those days. Left there after redundancy in 1994 and took up self employment so had only myself to worry about. So is it now a golden rule if you have to prove you are British when you obviously are?

The current proposals are so vague as to make it impossible to comment. A straightforward identity 'card' (whether physical or on a smartphone) is one thing. But an app on that phone that you have to present and interact with multiple times a day is another matter. I feel the current public response on data security is a bit overblown but anything can come out of the woodwork once it is launched.

 

[JamesT]

They seem to be concentrating on its use for right to work reasons and if it is just for that it is pretty useless for many of us. Now long retired so won't be seeking a job. But is this requirement to prove your ID etc for employment relatively new? When I took up what turned out to be a job for life in 1971 (with Ferranti, remember them?) I don't recall ever having to prove who I was, I was just a new graduate looking for a job who obviously looked British. I didn't have passport or driving licence in those days. Left there after redundancy in 1994 and took up self employment so had only myself to worry about. So is it now a golden rule if you have to prove you are British when you obviously are?

Right to work checks were introduced in the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996.
What does being ‘obviously British’ mean? Especially since 1983 it’s not a given that being born in the UK makes you a UK citizen and thus entitled to work here.

 

[DoubleLemon]

I see Darren Grimes is against Id cards, despite claiming they were the only answer to the uks problems a few months ago

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Sep 2025 ==

They seem to be concentrating on its use for right to work reasons and if it is just for that it is pretty useless for many of us. Now long retired so won't be seeking a job. But is this requirement to prove your ID etc for employment relatively new? When I took up what turned out to be a job for life in 1971 (with Ferranti, remember them?) I don't recall ever having to prove who I was, I was just a new graduate looking for a job who obviously looked British. I didn't have passport or driving licence in those days. Left there after redundancy in 1994 and took up self employment so had only myself to worry about. So is it now a golden rule if you have to prove you are British when you obviously are?

The current proposals are so vague as to make it impossible to comment. A straightforward identity 'card' (whether physical or on a smartphone) is one thing. But an app on that phone that you have to present and interact with multiple times a day is another matter. I feel the current public response on data security is a bit overblown but anything can come out of the woodwork once it is launched.

no. I'm concentrating on that as that is my area of professional expertise. it's also what the far right were saying was the only solution not long ago.

 

[dangie]

This is a good pointer as to why the UK is on a self destruct mode. Not because of ID cards per se, but because of whatever any government proposes or wants to introduce, the opposition and much of the population are against it. Much of this is not for any genuine logical reason, but because they can.