Labour MPs warn Government digital ID scheme will unnecessarily cost support
Labor MPs have said the government risks losing support for digital ID proposals as they voice concerns about the impact and cost on civil liberties.
Nadia Whittome, Richard Burgon, Charlotte Nichols and Stella Creasy questioned how necessary the IDs were and whether the government could have spent the money better.
Technology Minister Liz Kendall has said digital IDs will only be mandatory for employers to see right-to-work checks as the Government proposes to crack down on illegal work.
But Ms Kendall added it could improve access to public services for those who wanted it.
Meanwhile, Ms Kendall said only employers, not individuals, would face sanctions and police would never demand to see IDs.
He said the government had learned from countries such as Estonia and Denmark, which already use IDs and allow people to “tell their story once” when dealing with public services.
MPs heard consultations would begin before the end of the year as they were told any system would be built “in-house”.
Ms Kendall said: “When you look at other countries and what they’ve done, it’s really enabled the government to be built around the people, rather than making people fit into the government and its different services, and I think that’s a huge benefit.”
But Ms Whittome (Nottingham East) warned the Government risked “political capital burning out”.
He said: “I don’t know how many doors I’ve knocked on in my 12 years as a Labor member, but I do know that not a single person has told me that mandatory digital ID is what they really need to improve their lives, their communities and this country.
“It will not combat irregular work, it will undermine civil liberties, it will cause division among the population and it will not make a difference to people’s lives.
“So I ask the Secretary of State, why are we doing this? Why are we spending political capital and public money on this instead of focusing on the issues that really affect our voters?”
“I’m worried this is also a big mistake.”
His party colleague, Mr Burgon (Leeds East), said: “I am firmly opposed to digital identity, given the serious threats it poses to civil liberties, our data security and the transfer of data to US tech giants.
“But isn’t this also a really big waste of money, and shouldn’t the Government instead focus on the number one priority for people across the country, which is tackling the cost of living crisis, and wouldn’t the money from that be better funneled into that while protecting civil liberties?”
Ms Nichols (Warrington North) said: “I have been contacted in recent weeks by a number of constituents who have healthy doubts that digital ID will make a material difference to tackling illegal immigration, which I share.”
He asked Ms Kendall to give concrete examples of how the IDs could be used by the public.
Ms Kendall replied: “I believe there will be very important voluntary pathways in the future that will enable people to have better access to services and support, and we will consult fully on this when we put forward these detailed proposals.”
Mrs Kendall refused to give a figure as to how much it would cost, despite the insistence of Mrs Creasy (Walthamstow).
Ms Creasy said she found it cost between £1bn and £2bn to set up the scheme and then £100m a year was needed to run it.
He also said the cost of a data breach could be as much as 1.1% of GDP.
Ms Creasy said: “(Ms Kendall) said it would be free. Ultimately taxpayers will have to pay for it.”
He added: “Could he at least give us a figure, if not a figure, for the capital and revenue costs he has identified?”
Ms Kendall responded: “I think we also need to look at the potential benefits of this in terms of savings in terms of preventing fraud, making services more effective and efficient, and the final cost of that will obviously depend on the design and structure we advise on.”
Conservatives claimed the plan would “fundamentally alter the balance of power between citizens and the state.”
Shadow science, innovation and technology secretary Julia Lopez said: “(Sir Keir Starmer) knows this won’t stop the boats, and when Brits are forced to get IDs while illegal immigration continues unabated, it will only confirm the fears of a two-tiered society, fueling the division and conspiracy theories he arrogantly claims to be the antidote to.”
He continued: “This isn’t a Luddite versus modernisers thing. It’s about the fact that Labor can’t stand up to its big socialist dreams – centralized databases, state power, big money, exclusion of private sector expertise. Why have you created this honeypot for hackers?”
Responding, Ms Kendall said: “Yes, this is definitely the first time I’ve been called a ‘huge socialist’.”
Former defense secretary Andrew Murrison said three million people had signed an online petition against the policy.
Ms Kendall replied: “I think trying to get government services to talk to each other and work more effectively is what people want.”
