Argument for rolling out ‘creepy’ digital ID ‘too optimistic to be convincing’
A Tory shadow minister has warned digital identity plans are “frankly chilling” as he called for “evidence” that a new system would help curb illegal working.
Shadow science minister Viscount Camrose has warned that the Government’s argument for introducing a digital ID system is “too optimistic to be convincing”.
Technology Minister Liz Kendall told MPs earlier this week that the plan was “about giving people more power over their lives”.
He said these digital ID cards meant data was “much less likely to be lost or stolen” and added that a pub punter could “prove you are over 18 without even revealing your full date of birth”, “with privacy built into the system from the start”.
Ms Kendall also said the plan would “provide greater fairness by showing exactly who has the right to work here in the UK”.
Responding in the Lords, Viscount Camrose said: “If allowed to become law, electors risk being subjected to an extraordinary expansion of state power, not only at the expense of personal liberty but also at great cost to taxpayers.”
He demanded “evidence” that digital IDs would meet the Government’s objectives, adding: “Criminal gangs and illegal workers already operate outside formal employment and taxation systems.
“They don’t care about paperwork or credentials, they operate illegally beyond current regulations.
“They overturn existing national insurance requirements.
“So why would we expect digital identity to be any different?”
The Viscount told his colleagues that the plan was “untested” and that the Government’s view was “too optimistic to be convincing”.
He added that the proposal was “broad in its aims, weak in its details and, frankly, frightening in its reach into our privacy.”
Viscount Camrose said: “Better online services do not require a centralized identity regime.
“We already have mechanisms in place such as right-to-work checks and DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) verification.”
Liberal Democrat science spokesman Lord Clement-Jones described the early-stage plans as “another fundamental mistake this Government has made”.
He added: “The real issue here is not technology, it’s freedom.”
But Lord Patrick Vallance defended the plans, arguing digital ID would be mandatory “only for right-to-work checks”.
He said it was “a very narrow use for a very specific purpose.”
Lord Vallance, the government’s former chief scientific adviser and now science minister, continued: “But we have always believed, and continue to believe, that there are huge advantages to a digitally enabled society, a society in which everyone can participate, where everyone feels a sense of agency, and where everyone’s life is made easier thanks to a digital key that actually unlocks access to services.”
The Labor peer also said: “In countries where digital identity is well established, the private sector has built a wide range of services around it, making everyday tasks such as open banking, renting a flat, applying for a mortgage – all faster, simpler and more secure.
“But that’s not a required use of it; the required use is for the right to work.”
