No, digital ID will not stop the boats

UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced earlier this month that the government is considering introducing digital IDs in order to curb illegal immigration.

Speaking to the BBC earlier this month, Starmer said that the introduction of a digital-ID scheme could make the UK less attractive to those entering illegally. ‘My instinct is [ID cards] can play an important part [in deterring illegal immigrants]’, he said. Work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden voiced a similar view to Starmer during a trip to Estonia in August. He said that a digital-ID scheme would make it much harder for people ‘to come to the UK [to] work illegally if they don’t have a right to work’. The government is effectively arguing that the absence of a digital ID is one of the primary reasons that illegal immigrants want to come to the UK. McFadden calls it a ‘pull factor’.

Digital IDs have long been an obsession of our technocratic elites. They were pushed most zealously during the 2000s by former Labour prime minister Tony Blair, who continues to advocate for them through the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. So perhaps it’s no surprise that Starmer, Blair’s technocratic heir, is now leading the charge.

When Blair was originally promoting an early form of digital ID two decades ago, the public really weren’t buying it. People saw it as an unnecessary intrusion. Today, however, many are far more receptive to the idea. According to a recent Ipsos poll, 57 per cent of Brits support the introduction of national ID cards, with support highest among Conservative voters over 55.

The reason is not hard to fathom. People are now so fed up with illegal immigration that that they will clutch at any straw that promises to make a difference.

And that’s the big problem here. There is simply no evidence that digital IDs would stem the flow of illegal immigration into the UK. After all, Germany, France and Spain already have ID cards, yet all three countries struggle with illegal immigration on an arguably greater scale than the UK.

Those entering the UK illegally are attracted by the prospect of accessing some form of employment. Digital ID cards will make little difference in this regard. After all, under existing laws, employers already have to check that prospective candidates have the right to work in the UK. Companies can be fined up to £60,000 for every unauthorised worker.

Indeed, the UK, like every developed country, has a visa system. As a foreigner, you cannot work or live in the UK without one.

The problem then is not the presence or absence of a digital-ID scheme. It’s the existence of shady employers only too willing to rely on the cheap labour of illegal immigrants. Given that these employers clearly don’t care about employing someone without a visa or a residency permit, why would they care if someone doesn’t have a digital ID?

To make the case for digital ID on the grounds of tackling illegal immigration seems cynical and opportunistic. It is hard to avoid the suspicion that it is just a pretext to further encroach on our civil liberties. The invasive potential of digital IDs should not be underestimated. In China, digital ID is a key mechanism in social control. ID cards are linked to biometric databases (facial recognition and fingerprints) as well as national databases. Police and security services can easily access anyone’s travel history, family links and political activity. A digital-ID scheme can be used to restrict an individual’s access to almost every public service, from hospitals to banking.

While the UK isn’t about to become Communist China, introducing ID cards still creates the potential for greater, more intrusive social control in the future. This might sound alarmist. But how many people would have predicted a decade ago that people would be arrested for saying that a man cannot become a woman, or that news stories and even speeches in parliament would be blocked online?

Digital IDs also pose significant security risks. If hacked, millions could have their sensitive personal information stolen at once. And given many would likely have their digital ID on their smartphones, this would provide a further incentive for phone thieves.

In short, a digital-ID system would violate the privacy of millions of citizens and threaten hard-won freedoms, while doing little to deter people from arriving in the UK illegally. We need to stand up to this illiberal and illogical idea.

Samuel Turner is an MA journalism student.