[HN Gopher] Government drops plans for mandatory digital ID to w...
___________________________________________________________________
Government drops plans for mandatory digital ID to work in UK
Author : FridayoLeary
Score : 156 points
Date : 2026-01-14 15:29 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| AlexandrB wrote:
| For now.
|
| For whatever reason, Tony Blair's think tank is obsessed with
| this idea[1]. As I understand he still has a lot of influence
| over British politics.
|
| [1] https://institute.global/digital-id-what-is-it-and-how-it-
| wo...
| scrlk wrote:
| > For whatever reason, Tony Blair's think tank is obsessed with
| this idea.
|
| Probably considers it as unfinished business from his
| administration:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_Cards_Act_2006
| vimda wrote:
| If you ignore all the big red flags, it _is_ an attractive and
| convenient idea. One ID for all my government services? Useful.
| The devil, as always, is in the details
| vablings wrote:
| There are absolutely ways to implement a digital ID system
| that is not soaking wet with red flags. See the following:
| https://www.eid.admin.ch/en/swiyu-coming-soon-e
| nephihaha wrote:
| It doesn't originate with him, it is being phased in
| internationally. It's obviously been discussed far more widely.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| It may not originate with Tony Blair, but he might be the one
| trying to get it passed in the UK specifically.
| nprateem wrote:
| Anyone with half a brain can see it could be a good idea.
| Everything else is online, why shouldn't ID be? Better to send
| a validated token to companies doing KYC than actual PII. And
| that's before you get into the illegal immigration, right to
| work, etc.
|
| I really don't understand the arguments against it. You don't
| think the State can't shut you down if you break the law
| already?
| noodlesUK wrote:
| It sounds like they've dropped the digital ID part being
| mandatory, but not the digital right-to-work checks being
| mandatory. I suspect that the UK will end up building something
| like the US's E-Verify programme, which allows a number of
| documents to be checked against authoritative sources. It really
| wouldn't be that hard to build a service that in the first
| instance allowed you to generate a share code with a GBR passport
| much the same way people can generate share codes with their
| drivers licenses or UKVI accounts.
|
| What I have a problem with is just how fragmented and broken the
| UK immigration system is when you have the misfortune of coming
| into contact with it. It's (like many such large systems
| worldwide) a set of policies and rules that have accumulated over
| time into something that is pathologically poorly thought out.
| I'm going through the process of renewing my spouse's visa (I'm
| British), and it's fractally awful -- we've just had a snarky
| email from our landlord who is worried that the right-to-rent
| permission is expiring, but it's not possible to apply for a
| renewal for the visa prior to 28 days before expiry of her
| current visa. I meet all the criteria to sponsor my spouse for
| renewal, but the evidentiary burden is insane (I've collected
| 400+ pages of documents so far). Nobody wants this. It is very
| expensive and difficult (probably >PS10k per person until
| permanent residency in fees, not including legal expenses) to be
| compliant even if you meet the criteria, which just leads people
| falling out of status (to borrow an American term). The
| government (of all stripes) tries to be "tough" but the only
| lever it knows how to pull is to make the rules stricter, not
| making them better enforced or align with some meaningful policy
| agenda.
|
| This farcical situation extends into the UK's broken citizenship
| model where there are 6 different types of nationality, none of
| which give any rights you can't build through a hodgepodge of
| other different statuses. As far as I know the UK is the only
| country in the world that permits dual nationality _with itself_!
|
| A government online account which can generate verifiable
| credentials would probably be helpful in a broad sense but it
| wouldn't cure bad policy which is rampant in the UK immigration
| sector. I'd much rather have some kind of digital ID that's clear
| and authoritative rather than just hoping that Experian has my
| details right with no recourse if they're wrong.
| exe34 wrote:
| > As far as I know the UK is the only country in the world that
| permits dual nationality with itself!
|
| How does one apply for this?
| noodlesUK wrote:
| It's possible to have been born with multiple forms of
| British nationality such as being BOTC (e.g. bermudians) and
| a British citizen at the same time.
|
| It's also possible for e.g. a BNO to register for British
| citizenship after a period of residence in the UK. This does
| not extinguish the original nationality. Most hong kongers
| with British citizenship are in this bucket.
| exe34 wrote:
| Oh right, so it's British Empire vs British mainland
| citizenship.
| chippiewill wrote:
| Yeah, it's not as crazy as they make it sound. They're
| also technically a Commonwealth citizen and previously an
| EU citizen.
|
| Not exactly two citizenships of the same country.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| It really is pretty crazy that some of the more esoteric
| forms of citizenship have never been rolled into "British
| Citizen". Almost all BOTCs were given the opportunity to
| become British Citizens, but not all, and they kept the
| original status around. BNOs are similarly a somewhat
| silly situation especially now that it's possible to move
| to the UK on the special BNO visa (which gives them
| different/better family reunion rights than normal
| British citizens). British Subjects essentially don't
| exist in practice, but they also haven't just rolled that
| into British Citizen status either (British Subject is
| the residual status of certain Irish born people who
| chose to retain the status - they have the right to live
| in the UK on the basis of their Irish nationality, not on
| their British nationality which is insane). There's just
| a perpetual allergy to just rationalising the whole
| setup.
|
| It would be perfectly politically acceptable to just do
| away with the statuses that have fewer than say 5000
| people and grant them all full-fat citizenship. Generally
| people who live in the UK are shocked when they find out
| that holding a British passport does not entitle you to
| the right to live in the UK.
| vablings wrote:
| The whole headache around good legal immigration is exactly why
| I left the UK after getting married. The costs, timeline and
| paperwork associated is insane! The US system is fairly bad
| too, but the rules and categories are clear cut with reasonable
| timelines
| masfuerte wrote:
| > This farcical situation extends into the UK's broken
| citizenship model where there are 6 different types of
| nationality, none of which give any rights you can't build
| through a hodgepodge of other different statuses.
|
| There is one right. If you are British at birth they can't
| strip your citizenship and kick you out. Everyone else's
| residence is at the whim of the Home Secretary.
| funnybeam wrote:
| Not heard of Shamima Begum?
|
| British born, stripped of citizenship
|
| I'm not commenting on the rightness or not of her case, just
| pointing out that being born British is not necessarily the
| guarantee you are describing
| masfuerte wrote:
| She was entitled to citizenship but she wasn't born with
| it. My cousin's children were in a similar position having
| been born outside the UK.
| funnybeam wrote:
| According to Wikipedia she was born in Britain and a
| British citizen, but i am not aware of all the ins and
| outs of her case
| masfuerte wrote:
| I'm not an immigration lawyer but as I understand it:
| having been born in the UK as the child of Bangladeshi
| parents who were living here legally she was entitled to
| British citizenship, but she wasn't British
| automatically. They would have had to apply for it. As
| such, the politicians were able to take it away.
|
| This is quite a recent change in the law. Prior to 2014
| they could only strip citizenship if you applied and
| received it without having a right to it (e.g. if you
| were born abroad to non-British parents). After 2014
| naturalised citizens (like Begum) were also liable.
|
| I do think it is a bad law and she is being treated
| disgracefully. There's still hope the ECHR will sort it.
| chippiewill wrote:
| Wrong way round. She was born in the UK and was a British
| Citizen at birth and had a British passport
|
| She is (maybe) entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship which
| is why the UK government was allowed under UK law to
| remove her British citizenship because British courts
| didn't consider her to be stateless.
|
| The only people who can't have British citizenship
| removed are British citizens with no other citizenship or
| entitlement to a citizenship. I think in theory that
| means the British government is legally allowed to remove
| citizenship from any person from Northern Ireland if they
| justify it (since they're allowed to claim Irish
| citizenship under the Good Friday agreement).
| masfuerte wrote:
| At birth she was entitled to citizenship but she wasn't a
| citizen. Like my cousins. I describe the nuance in my
| other comments on this thread.
| jlokier wrote:
| > If you are British at birth they can't strip your
| citizenship and kick you out
|
| Not true. If you have dual nationality at birth, typically
| because you have one British parent and are born in the UK,
| then you are British at birth but the Home Secretary has the
| power to strip you of British citizenship anyway.
|
| So, paradoxically, a child born in the UK to a British mother
| can end up with stronger UK citizenship rights if the mother
| doesn't reveal who the father is.
|
| That's not as bad as if you are a naturalized British
| citizen. In that case, the Home Secretary has the power to
| strip you of British citzenship and leave you entirely
| stateless (you have no citizenship anywhere), which you can
| imagine is a very difficult status to live with.
| masfuerte wrote:
| This is what I thought until last week. Then I read the
| actual legislation. The 2014 changes apply to naturalised
| citizens. If you are born with two citizenships you aren't
| naturalised.
| rwmj wrote:
| Also Irish citizens in Britain have the same rights as British
| citizens (even voting), plus all the benefits of EU citizenship
| too. Brexit made us second class citizens in our own country.
| Good job everyone.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| You know the UK desperately needs to spend billions on a never
| ending software project with some awful agencies building the
| impossible.
| IshKebab wrote:
| Shame. This made a lot of sense.
|
| > existing checks, using documents such as biometric passports,
| will move fully online by 2029.
|
| Well I guess that's good at least. I imagine they'll just assign
| people "digital passports" at some point and you just pay to get
| a paper copy.
| Pet_Ant wrote:
| All this rigor for a country without an actual formalised
| constitution. I mean, maybe the government should work on that
| first and make sure it has a right to work there first?
|
| > Unlike in most countries, no official attempt has been made to
| codify ... thus it is known as an uncodified constitution.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kin...
| dgxyz wrote:
| Based on recent events, I wouldn't suggest a constitution makes
| much of a difference to an adversarial government.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| This. The illusion that you could fend off tyranny with a
| piece of paper was always a bit ridiculous, and it shows.
| isk517 wrote:
| Arguably it's purpose is to define where government
| responsibility ends and tyranny begins. Very useful if the
| population it applies to cares about it being violated
| gizajob wrote:
| The Magna Carta was meant to formalise that spec 800
| years ago.
| exe34 wrote:
| I suspect there is a hysteresis loop - it has to get
| really bad before the population changes phase.
| bogdan wrote:
| I'm sorry but how is this relevant? Or did you just recently
| learn this and thought it's "interesting" to share?
| Pet_Ant wrote:
| They want to have rigorous well-indexed system for the people
| in a country, when the system of the country isn't rigorous.
|
| When your constitution is ad hoc, it seems only fair that
| everything else is. Start with the foundation before
| formalising everything else.
| lifetimerubyist wrote:
| How's that piece of paper working out for you guys right now?
| LegitShady wrote:
| their goal is to expand the orwellian spying panopticon, not to
| codify people's rights.
| everyday7732 wrote:
| This line was particluarly interesting:
|
| "... Labour MPs are growing increasingly frustrated with the
| government's U-turns.
|
| Some had already been wary of defending controversial government
| policies to their constituents because they feared that the
| policy would inevitably be reversed."
|
| which implies that the MPs are openly admitting that they don't
| state their personal opinions, merely parrot the party line, but
| are frustrated when they are required to abruptly change the
| things they claim to believe in.
|
| What a farce. Members of parliament should have their OWN fucking
| views about things, and defend or debate those views on behalf of
| the people they represent.
| OgsyedIE wrote:
| Those people get deselected by the NEC.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| That why they have party whips and threaten deselections for
| people that have their own ideas.
|
| Many of these people would not be in Parliament if they weren't
| selected by the party. Most people vote for a party, not the
| MP. So why would it benefit the MP to have their own views when
| they can just parrot whatever they've been told to? It doesn't.
| throwaway85825 wrote:
| The most ridiculous thing about UK politics is that there is
| zero residency requirement.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| There is always something in the UK where I find out
| something utterly ridiculous is allowed, yet they are quite
| happy to legislate thousands of other things.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| Seen that the entire plan of the UK atm apparently relies on
| bringing in as many illegals as possible in the shortest time
| possible, I don't see how that'd be compatible with a mandatory
| digital ID.
|
| So I'm not surprised to see this trashed.
| gizajob wrote:
| This will lead to Reform and then to Reform Pro Max with extra
| ICE, which should then combat that issue.
| vablings wrote:
| Just curious where you are seeing this? Illegal immigration
| figures are down under the current government
| exe34 wrote:
| > Seen that the entire plan of the UK atm apparently relies on
| bringing in as many illegals as possible in the shortest time
| possible
|
| Could you say a bit more about this? I didn't find it in their
| manifesto from the last election. Is it a new policy? Do you
| know which minister is responsible?
| blitzar wrote:
| You are thinking of the party that was previously in
| government.
| Flere-Imsaho wrote:
| It's completely in the current gov's power to stop all
| illegal immigration and to stem the flow of legal
| immigration. For whatever reason I cannot fathom, they do not
| enact that power.
|
| At some point we have to stop blaming the previous
| government.
| elric wrote:
| When I lived in the UK in the early-mid 00s, I was really
| confused by how much of a digital backwater it was. Opening a
| bank account required several months of utility bills (on paper!)
| with my name as "proof of address". Taxes were paper only. Paper
| payslips. No concept of interacting with the government in any
| digital way. No concept of government ID other than a full size
| passport, which made the many silly age checks in pubs and stores
| rather laughable.
|
| I'm sure things have gotten better, but I'll never forget how
| backwards it all seemed coming from puny Belgium.
| gizajob wrote:
| Hmm try Italy or Spain...
| calgoo wrote:
| Spain was finally forced to improve some of their systems
| during covid. Its still a bit of a mess, but at least you can
| do some things online now.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| When I lived in Spain getting my NIE number was a pain as
| the office was open for 2 hours in the morning. Luckily I
| was with an English person that spoke Spanish that helped
| me fill out the forms.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| > No concept of government ID other than a full size passport,
| which made the many silly age checks in pubs and stores rather
| laughable.
|
| Memorising your Birthday to be 2 years earlier to fool the pub
| bouncer was what we all did.
| vablings wrote:
| Things for sure are better, once you are kinda on the digital
| ladder with various things its ok. Drivers License, NI Number,
| Passport and Proof of address documents are all fairly trivial
| to get
|
| Payslips are fully automated and there is a nice HMRC app that
| lets you see your PAYE income. Also, the NHS app is not half
| bad, you can mostly access any previous information but its not
| always fully populated due to a mixed bag of records
| laurencerowe wrote:
| The UK has had internet filing for self-assessment taxes since
| July 2000 [1]. I started doing freelance web consulting around
| them while at university and filed online. It was considerably
| easier than filing my taxes in the US is now! (Most people in
| the UK don't have to file taxes at all since the right amount
| of tax is withheld by their employer.)
|
| While the UK might not have been the first, there was a big
| push to move government services online over the 2000s. I think
| this may have been easier than in other countries since so many
| services were run by post rather than requiring you to go to a
| particular government office.
|
| Opening a bank account became much more difficult in the early
| 2000s because of the money laundering/terrorism financing
| legislation. It became a real pain for international students
| when I worked in a student union back then.
|
| The liberal resistance to ID cards in Britain was more
| reasonable before it became required to prove your identity so
| often. Not having an ID card has become a bit of a pain now,
| especially for elderly people who may not have a driving
| licence or current passport.
|
| [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fascinating-facts-
| about-s...
| jph wrote:
| I'm in the affected group because I'm a US citizen working in the
| UK. There's much more to the story because the UK has many
| digital ID aspects already in place-- such as for work visas and
| residence permits-- but these not coordinated into a whole.
|
| What I experienced last year was many digital verification steps
| that were all required: open a UK bank account, sign up for a UK
| phone number, secure a UK residential postal address, apply for
| UK right-to-rent codes, generate a UK national insurance number,
| file for UK healthcare registration, and more.
|
| Each step had different digital workflows and UI/UX. To traverse
| all these steps took hundreds of hours and a couple months wall
| time.
|
| Many steps had catch-22s. The UK bank account needed a UK phone
| number, while the UK phone company needed a UK bank account. The
| UK payroll company needed a permanent residence, while the UK
| landlord needed UK payroll stubs. None of the steps had a quick
| simple way to digitally verify my UK work visa.
|
| IMHO federation could be a big help here, such as for government
| agencies and government-approved businesses doing opt-in data
| sharing and ideally via APIs. For example, imagine each step can
| share its relevant information with other steps. This could make
| things more efficient, more accurate, and ideally more secure.
| godzillabrennus wrote:
| People who vote for more government are people who rarely deal
| with government.
| coredev_ wrote:
| And I guess people who vote for less government are people
| who never have dealt with good and efficient government, only
| government destoyed by people who don't want it to work or
| lobbying companies.
|
| Where I live e-government is super smooth, like having your
| taxes filed for you - all you have to do is to sign it with
| your e-id. E-id is, as I see it, actually saftey for me as a
| citizen, with delegated security so that the SP only get
| verification and the info actually needed from the IDP.
|
| Although requiring it for porn is just sick.
| cadamsdotcom wrote:
| Sorry people are downvoting you, I guess some folks think
| the downvote is for people they disagree with. But this is
| my experience too: government that works and is smooth and
| efficient can turn one into a fan.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| The government is famously dysfunctional in the UK. It is
| unlikely to get any better. So most of us would rather they
| do nothing than make the situation worse.
|
| I've lived in other countries in Europe and their
| government isn't that smooth either. In fact the UK was
| much better than Spain when I lived there, though things
| may have changed now.
| graemep wrote:
| I am a bit confused about this. Is that a list of things you
| needed to open a bank account? Or a list of things for which
| you needed to show ID?
|
| I am not sure a government digital ID would help with dealing
| with businesses.
|
| Right to rent is a stupid and useless bit of bureaucracy which
| encourages racism - its much easier for landlords not to rent
| to someone who looks or sounds foreign, especially at the
| bottom end of the market where people might not have passports.
|
| Edit: I should have said something like discrimination on
| grounds of race or national origin. The landlords are not
| motivated by a desire to discriminate, but to avoid have to
| carry out checks, especially if they do not understand the
| requirements with regard to visas - easier just to let to
| someone who (they think!) is definitely British.
| nephihaha wrote:
| "There's much more to the story because the UK has many digital
| ID aspects already in place-- such as for work visas and
| residence permits-- but these not coordinated into a whole."
|
| They're determined to bring it in and will attempt to
| gradually. You need an ID for so many things in the UK so it is
| a lie in some ways.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| I haven't shown my photocard drivers license in literally
| years to anyone, other than renewing it.
|
| I normally just use Birthcert and Utility bills.
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| The point is that the government tried to sell this as helping
| against illegal immigration by enabling effective right to work
| checks and this was a blatant lie since it would not change
| anything: right to work checks are already carried put amd
| legal immigrants have eVisa that are checked online by
| employers.
|
| It is obvious that the government is being deceitful. Noone
| wants ID cards except the Tony Blair Institute.
| aberoham wrote:
| Can relate. The UK electronic eVisa app was pure garbage. The
| major redeeming feature of the UK civil service and the various
| regulatory quagmires is that they're effectively open source.
| You (or Claude) can read through their practice manuals or
| policies and find a work-around. But my goodness is it annoying
| until you figure that out. Another fascinating bit is you may
| think the various departments are connected but they are not.
| The nice looking UK Government Digital Service (GDS) Design
| System gives everything a veneer of connected competence, but
| under the bonnet, that slick UI signal is as reliable as a posh
| accent. Don't become a migrant if you don't have to.
| solumunus wrote:
| It's not a bad idea necessarily, unfortunately it would just be
| a massive political own goal in the current environment.
| altacc wrote:
| I moved from the UK to Scandinavia, where there is a federated
| ID (BankID) that you use to access pretty much everything and
| it removes all this complexity that the UK has. I can't imagine
| life without such an easy system. One of the downsides is that
| there's a bit of a catch-22 to getting an ID in the first place
| but once you've managed that it's done.
|
| A key difference is the relationship between the people and the
| government and the motivation behind creating a federated ID.
| There's definitely an element of governmental monitoring to the
| Scandinavian model but the relationship with the government is
| less adversarial than in the UK.
| graemep wrote:
| They are still trying to bring in digital ID. There are multiple
| attempts to push it. They still plan to try to push it as a
| convenience. They also plan a digital ID for children.
| shevy-java wrote:
| It can be called digital fascism. Everyone gets monitored now.
| Big government loves you.
| vablings wrote:
| Not sure what invoking children here does for the sake of
| argumentation. Digital ID is not bad; the issue is the
| implementation of digital ID that will cause huge issues such
| as giving billions of pounds to friends of MPs
| graemep wrote:
| > Not sure what invoking children here does for the sake of
| argumentation.
|
| Because by requiring children, but not adults, to have
| digital ID as part of a much larger (and pretty terrible) law
| that is already close to being passed and disguising it as a
| safeguarding measure they are sneaking it in for some people
| AND getting the next generation used to it.
|
| > Digital ID is not bad;
|
| The opposition to digital ID is largely coming from people
| who do think Digital ID is bad.
| vablings wrote:
| Digital ID is a very wishy-washy concept that has been co-
| opted by various groups to make strong statements about
| government overreach. If you want to make criticism you
| should make narrower statements, for example.
|
| A centralized ID system that can be used to safely verify
| the authenticity of a presenting party is good!
|
| If that system can be used to track this person in more
| invasive ways than already possible with IMSI catchers,
| credit cards and facial recognition that is bad!
|
| People think Digital ID is bad and this everlasting evil
| concept that will further make the most surveilled country
| in the world an Orwellian nightmare overnight which is a
| dramatization. The devil is really in the details here and
| depending on what flavors of implementation determines the
| "goodness"
| nephihaha wrote:
| Digital ID alone is not the endgoal but a system that will
| encompass every aspect of people's lives, and can be switched
| off in an instant.
| vablings wrote:
| I heard the same hogwash over covid and vaccine passports,
| it didn't happen.
| shevy-java wrote:
| While that is great, the lobbyists who disguise as politicians
| who tried to sneak this in, need to permanently leave ALL
| affiliations to politics. Politics right now in the UK is just a
| lobbyist sleaze fest.
| curiousgal wrote:
| It's almost comical how bad this Labour government is...
| indy wrote:
| They became so bad so quickly and now all that's happening is
| more and more people swearing never to vote Labour again. This
| is leaving the door open for Reform at the next election.
| 9JollyOtter wrote:
| They won't be any better. Farage is ultimately untrustworthy.
| nephihaha wrote:
| Now they will just make it very hard for those who opt out.
| nprateem wrote:
| A useless government lacking any sort of leadership. At a stroke
| this would destroy illegal immigration if it was mandatory and
| tied to receiving benefits.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-14 23:01 UTC)