UK digital ID plan triggers regional backlash as Labour outlines new system

The United Kingdom is moving toward a mandatory digital identity system, a plan proposed by Labour and supported by the government, that would store an identity on residents' devices and be used to prove the right to work in the UK. Officials say the change could help curb illegal immigration and simplify access to public services, while opponents warn it could force people to identify as British and infringe daily freedoms.

Scottish First Minister John Swinney said that calling the plan "Brit Card" risks pressuring Scots to declare themselves British, insisting he is a Scot. He rejected the notion that the plan would be called a Brit Card, and said digital ID should not be seen as a compulsory national marker. Douglas Alexander, the Scottish Secretary, argued that the scheme will not be called or treated as a card and that it will be required on mobile devices. He told BBC Radio Scotland that the government plans would require people to have the digital ID on their phones, noting that citizens already carry boarding passes, tickets, and loyalty cards on devices. He also stressed that no one would be compelled to carry it or show it unless to prove right to work.

The plan, the government says, would be mandatory by the end of the current Parliament and would serve as the authoritative proof of identity and residency status in the UK, including name, date of birth, and a photo, as well as nationality and residency status. It would live on devices such as smartphones, and the consultation process would address arrangements for people who do not use smartphones, including the possibility of a physical card. Proponents argue this mirrors digital ID systems in other countries, such as Australia, Estonia, and Denmark, and would make it easier to access public services and verify working rights.

Northern Ireland's politics quickly turned contentious. First Minister Michelle O’Neill, a Sinn Féin leader, described the plan as ludicrous and argued it would undermine rights under the Good Friday Agreement and affect Irish citizens in the North. Sinn Féin's John Finucane called the proposal farcical, telling BBC programmes that post-Brexit attempts by British governments to shield immigration from scrutiny risk eroding the Good Friday Agreement. An Alliance Party MP, Sorcha Eastwood, said she would not support the Digital ID scheme, stressing concerns about privacy and civil liberties.

Keir Starmer and Labour defend the plan as a long-term measure to tackle illegal migration and modernize public services. The Prime Minister has framed digital ID as an opportunity to secure borders and reduce illegal work, while acknowledging legitimate concerns. He wrote in The Telegraph that while it is natural to worry about immigration, left-leaning parties should not shy away from addressing the issue. The approach envisages IDs stored on devices as the primary proof of identity and residency, but, per officials, not all citizens would be forced to carry or produce them; those who do not wish to engage digitally would have alternative arrangements.

Reactions across the political spectrum have varied widely. Reform UK called the plan a cynical ploy to mislead voters about immigration, while the Liberal Democrats cautioned against making private data a daily necessity. Tony Blair’s think tank floated the idea that even a voluntary ID card could act as a gateway to government services, a point echoed by some conservatives who noted that Blair previously championed discussion of ID cards in the early 2000s. The government argues digital IDs would be a future-facing tool, aligning with digital identity efforts seen in other nations and enabling smoother interaction with a range of public services.

The proposal comes as lawmakers prepare to publish more details ahead of a parliamentary timetable that seeks to have digital IDs in use by the conclusion of the current term. Supporters insist the system would be secure, help stem illegal working, and provide ordinary citizens with faster, safer access to essential services, while critics warn it could deepen privacy concerns and stigmatize residents who resist formal identification. The plan also underlines ongoing political fault lines over national identity, devolution, and Northern Ireland’s status within the United Kingdom, with implications that extend beyond the administration enacting the policy.