Labour digital ID plan: petition tops 1.4 million as Starmer backs reform

LONDON — Labour’s plan to require a digital identity for all workers drew renewed attention as a petition opposing the policy surpassed 1.4 million signatures. The party argues the ID would help curb illegal immigration and enable broader public-service reform, while civil liberties groups warned it would expand state power over individuals.

At the Global Progress Action Summit in London, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer framed the immigration system as something that must be fair and enforceable. He said the stakes are high and urged support for digital IDs as a pragmatic step. "Let me spell it out, you will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID," Starmer said. He added that, if the policy gains public support and functions effectively, it could underpin significant public service reform and act as the "bedrock of the modern state". The remarks came as Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister, described the policy as the one thing he most wanted to achieve in his cabinet role.

Under the plans, all workers would store a digital ID on their smartphones, which would serve as the authoritative proof of identity and residency in the UK. The ID would include a person’s name, date of birth and a photo, along with information on nationality and residency status. Supporters say it would streamline verification in the job market and help authorities tackle illegal work, but opponents question whether it would actually prevent people from working illegally or simply shift the burden of verification to individuals.

The petition opposing the introduction of digital ID cards continued to gain signatures, while proponents argued the policy would deliver a fairer immigration system. Shadow Pensions Secretary Helen Whately told Sky News that the plan would not automatically stop illegal working. "We’re hearing about people working in the grey economy [where jobs are hidden from the state] being paid in cash, being often paid well below the minimum wage," she said. "This is not about law-abiding employees failing to be able to identify whether people’s ID is legal or not; they’re not even checking ID."

Critics from opposition parties and civil liberties groups have argued the plan would widen state power and raise privacy concerns. Reform UK branded the scheme a "cynical ploy" intended to persuade voters that something is being done about immigration. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch dismissed the plan as a "gimmick" that would do little to stop people crossing the boats. The Liberal Democrats said they would fight the plan "tooth and nail" as nonsensical.

Alexander Iosad of the Tony Blair Institute argued that digital IDs could be the gateway to demonstrating that the state is on citizens’ side, while also noting that the scheme could store information about individuals centrally. He said the moment was ripe to deliver a robust ID system, adding: "This is the moment of opportunity to deliver it – it must not be missed."

The policy traces its roots to earlier proposals that have circulated for years in British politics. It hearkens back to discussions that were once pursued during Tony Blair’s tenure, with the Blair Institute later advocating a broader role for digital IDs. The idea has repeatedly resurfaced as a potential tool to combat illegal migration and to reshape how public services interact with residents. The current push reflects both the urgency of immigration concerns and a broader debate over digital governance and privacy in the United Kingdom.

If implemented, the digital ID would apply to anyone who works in the UK, requiring individuals to present their digital credential when asked. Supporters say the plan would simplify compliance for workers and employers alike and would empower authorities to verify residency status efficiently. Critics, however, warn of potential data misuse and the risk of exclusion for people who lack access to smartphones or who are reluctant to carry such credentials.

As the debate continues, the petition on Parliament’s website remains a focal point for the opposition to the policy. Proponents argue that a well-designed digital ID could coexist with strong privacy protections and be calibrated to minimize data collection, while opponents warn that even with safeguards, the centralization of identity data could become a new vector for state overreach. The coming weeks are expected to shape the policy’s trajectory, with party leaders and civil society groups weighing competing visions for how a digital ID system should function in a modern democracy.