The United Kingdom"s House of Commons will hold a debate on the introduction of a national digital ID card on Monday, December 8, following a UK parliament petition which has gathered almost 3 million signatures. As a bit of background, the UK does not yet have a national ID card, with people relying on passports and driver"s licenses.
The closest the country previously got to introducing ID cards was in the 2000s under Tony Blair, but opposition overwhelmed that drive. Now, the government is attempting to bring in a digital ID, but as the petition shows, it is still not a popular idea.
In anticipation of the debate, the Open Rights Group has warned that the government is implementing a digital surveillance infrastructure. It is key to mention that ORG often defaults to the privacy position; there are good arguments on both sides of the debate to introduce or not introduce a digital ID.
The ORG"s Pre-Crime Programme Manager, Sara Chitseko, said:
“Despite political and public opposition, the government is embarking on a digital surveillance infrastructure that could fundamentally change how we live. Once a national digital ID system is in place, mission creep is inevitable, forcing people to use it more and more in everyday life and opening the door to unprecedented tracking of our interactions with the State.
"Public trust in this scheme has been further undermined by misleading messages over how digital ID will be used.”
Open Rights Group pointed to new research, which suggests an existing eVisa scheme for migrants could offer a cautionary tale. It said that migrants are already subject to an extensive digital ID system that is full of problems, such as data errors, glitches, and internet outages that have repeatedly prevented migrants from proving their right to be in the UK. This has led to people being unable to travel, having job offers and mortgages withdrawn, and being made homeless.
According to the privacy group, a digital ID is not needed to enforce immigration policy. Instead, it says the government should fix the eVisa system instead of spending £1.8 billion on a new "population-wide surveillance scheme."