Labour’s incoming prime minister, Andy Burnham, is expected to scrap Keir Starmer’s plans for a national digital ID scheme when he takes office on Monday, a move his team described as a “reset of priorities”.

According to details provided by Burnham’s side on Saturday, resources earmarked for the programme will be redirected towards measures to ease the cost of living.

The decision is also intended to distance Burnham from choices made by Starmer’s administration. A petition opposing the introduction of digital ID cards after they were announced last year attracted about 3m signatures.

Reset of priorities

Burnham’s spokesperson said the new government would focus on “creating breathing space” and delivering changes people could feel in daily life.

They said time and funding allocated to a national ID scheme would instead be used on support for the cost of living.

The spokesperson also argued that power should be returned to communities rather than held in Whitehall.

Starmer’s “Brit card” plan

Starmer announced the digital ID proposals last September, saying they would be introduced to tackle illegal working. The scheme was planned to be rolled out by 2029.

Under the plans, the “Brit card” would have been compulsory for people needing to prove they were allowed to work in the UK. The cards were intended to include information such as residency status, name, date of birth and nationality, alongside the holder’s photograph.

Starmer said the rollout would make it tougher to work illegally and would strengthen border security.

However, it has been unclear how much money would be saved if the project is dropped, because Starmer’s government did not publish a clear budget for the initiative.

The Office for Budget Responsibility suggested the scheme could cost about £1.8bn, but that figure was rejected by officials.

Backlash and earlier rollback

The issue has been shaped by a history of ID policy in the Labour Party. Tony Blair’s government introduced legislation in 2006 intended to enable ID cards, drawing criticism from privacy campaigners. Those plans never took effect and were ultimately scrapped by the coalition government in 2011.

After Starmer’s proposals, Labour-aligned organisations including the Tony Blair Institute welcomed the idea of using digital ID to improve public services and build trust.

At the same time, opposition politicians and civil rights groups criticised the scheme. Conservative MP David Davis said governments and technology firms had repeatedly failed to protect personal data, arguing that Whitehall would not do better.

Labour’s political opponents also disputed the policy. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch described the announcement as a “throwaway” move designed to distract from Burnham’s “leadership manoeuvrings”, while the Liberal Democrats said they could not support a mandatory system forcing people to hand over private information to go about their daily lives.

Civil society groups warned the plan could amount to a surveillance infrastructure. Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group said Labour risked creating a “pre-crime state” in which people would constantly have to prove their identity.

Earlier this year, the government rolled back the ID-card plans and clarified that they would be voluntary, with workers able to verify their identity using existing documents such as passports. In May, Karen Bradley, chair of the Conservative home affairs select committee, said the announcement had been a “fiasco” that raised fears of government overreach and left the public with few answers.

Right-to-work checks remain

Sources close to Burnham said that, despite scrapping the digital ID project, he would still back the previous government’s crackdown on illegal working, which resulted in almost 9,000 arrests last year.

Right-to-work checks are expected to remain mandatory for employers. New legislation is also expected to extend verification requirements to parts of the gig economy, including parcel couriers and delivery drivers.

Lisa Smart, the Liberal Democrats’ cabinet office spokesperson, said people would be “hugely relieved” that they would no longer be forced to provide data for everyday activities.

The move to abandon the scheme may further unsettle technology experts already angered by Burnham’s wider plans to reshape Whitehall, including proposals to abolish the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Burnham has asked officials to develop plans to absorb much of the department into a more powerful business department.

Join the discussion?

19 July 2026

View full article

They'll have some sneaky way to get what they want via another method. OneGov for example. That's already being widely rolled out across Gubmint web sites. One of the first ones was Companies House, which has a few million accounts. Sneakily cynical.

2 minutes ago, BeastOfBodmin said:

They'll have some sneaky way to get what they want via another method. OneGov for example. That's already being widely rolled out across Gubmint web sites. One of the first ones was Companies House, which has a few million accounts. Sneakily cynical.

Burnham wipes out swaths of Digital ID conspiracy theories, only for another to pop up.

They grow like weeds in compost.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Burnham wipes out swaths of Digital ID conspiracy theories, only for another to pop up.

They grow like weeds in compost.

Gubmint machinations whack-a-mole.

Every country I've ever lived and worked in has required me to have an ID card or to carry my passport at all times, apart from Britain where a majority appears to oppose this for some reason.

BS

Burnham is NOT scrapping Britain’s digital identity architecture.

He is scrapping the unpopular name and one proposed national credential.

▪️http://GOV.UK One Login stays.
▪️The Government Wallet stays.
▪️Digital driving licences stay.
▪️Police access to DVLA records stays.
▪️eVisas and digital right-to-work checks stay.
▪️Mandatory Companies House identity verification stays.
▪️The statutory Digital Identity Trust Framework stays.
▪️NHS Login, the NHS App and the Single Patient Record stay.
▪️A unique identifying number for every child stays.
▪️Plans for universal newborn genomic testing and DNA storage stay.

The framework, legislation and machinery are already embedded across government departments.

And he certainly won’t dismantle the systems and legislation already being assembled to link your government “you” file together.

11 minutes ago, FinChin67 said:

BS

Burnham is NOT scrapping Britain’s digital identity architecture.

He is scrapping the unpopular name and one proposed national credential.

▪️http://GOV.UK One Login stays.
▪️The Government Wallet stays.
▪️Digital driving licences stay.
▪️Police access to DVLA records stays.
▪️eVisas and digital right-to-work checks stay.
▪️Mandatory Companies House identity verification stays.
▪️The statutory Digital Identity Trust Framework stays.
▪️NHS Login, the NHS App and the Single Patient Record stay.
▪️A unique identifying number for every child stays.
▪️Plans for universal newborn genomic testing and DNA storage stay.

The framework, legislation and machinery are already embedded across government departments.

And he certainly won’t dismantle the systems and legislation already being assembled to link your government “you” file together.

HMPO's online passport renewal service is presumably also staying - except that we're not allowed to use it when renewing our passports from Thailand for some bloody ridiculous reason!

But a pity that the http://GOV.UK One Login white elephant is staying, though, and that those of us with Government Gateway accounts will still be forced to migrate to it in due course. A classic example of change for pure change's sake, I think:

https://www.gov.uk/using-your-gov-uk-one-login

1 hour ago, FinChin67 said:

BS

Burnham is NOT scrapping Britain’s digital identity architecture.

He is scrapping the unpopular name and one proposed national credential.

▪️http://GOV.UK One Login stays.
▪️The Government Wallet stays.
▪️Digital driving licences stay.
▪️Police access to DVLA records stays.
▪️eVisas and digital right-to-work checks stay.
▪️Mandatory Companies House identity verification stays.
▪️The statutory Digital Identity Trust Framework stays.
▪️NHS Login, the NHS App and the Single Patient Record stay.
▪️A unique identifying number for every child stays.
▪️Plans for universal newborn genomic testing and DNA storage stay.

The framework, legislation and machinery are already embedded across government departments.

And he certainly won’t dismantle the systems and legislation already being assembled to link your government “you” file together.

You forgot National Insurance Number.… and the Government keeps records of your NI contributions.

I don't understand why anyone needs a national ID. People have driving licences, electricity bills and so on. Photo ID like passports exist.

I was going to receive some money being sent to me by someone in England. Bangkok Bank employee asked for a copy of his national ID card. I said that he doesn't have one.

She looked puzzled and said, how do people know who he is?

Is they ask, he will tell them who he is.

It seemed like a crazy notion at the time.

5 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Every country I've ever lived and worked in has required me to have an ID card or to carry my passport at all times, apart from Britain where a majority appears to oppose this for some reason.

ID cards didn't exist in the 19thC where they're all still living in their own minds - even the relatively enlightened ones as well.

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Burnham wipes out swaths of Digital ID conspiracy theories, only for another to pop up.

They grow like weeds in compost.

No wonder sinister scamsters and shysters like Farage and Lowe (in the UK) have such an easy time of it.

6 hours ago, Purdey said:

I don't understand why anyone needs a national ID. People have driving licences, electricity bills and so on. Photo ID like passports exist.

I was going to receive some money being sent to me by someone in England. Bangkok Bank employee asked for a copy of his national ID card. I said that he doesn't have one.

She looked puzzled and said, how do people know who he is?

Is they ask, he will tell them who he is.

It seemed like a crazy notion at the time.

In many cases, an ID card makes things much easily. My wife is Belgian-Thai. Her Belgian digital ID allows her to manage her tax affairs, have access to health records, see copies of legal documents e.g. house deeds, etc all by simply logging in. She controls who has access to what. For example, her bookkeeper can see her tax records but not her health details. It is just so much simpler than having numerous IDs for numerous portals as we have in the UK.

A physical ID card is used to identify yourself at banks, surgeries, etc.

I really don't understand why people in the UK object to ID cards so vehemently.

1 minute ago, RayC said:

I really don't understand why people in the UK object to ID cards so vehemently.

Because the totalitarian UK state will turn your entire life off for one dodgy FB posting.

Passport, banking, mobile phone, internet access, pension, benefits, health care ......... all gone at the touch of a button.

Edited July 20Jul 20 by BritManToo

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Because the totalitarian UK state will turn your entire life off for one dodgy FB posting.

Passport, banking, mobile phone, internet access, pension, benefits, health care ......... all gone at the touch of a button.

And yet no reports of that happening anywhere else in the world where digital IDs are used?

Is this type of totalitarianism unique to the UK?

7 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Because the totalitarian UK state will turn your entire life off for one dodgy FB posting.

Passport, banking, mobile phone, internet access, pension, benefits, health care ......... all gone at the touch of a button.

Please provide an example with sources!

6 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Please provide an example with sources!

I can't because they don't have digital ID ........ yet.

It's a plan for control of citizens in the future.

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

And yet no reports of that happening anywhere else in the world where digital IDs are used?

Is this type of totalitarianism unique to the UK?

Canada, they turned off the bank accounts of striking lorry drivers. 2022 ....... now in 2026 they're thinking of turning their accounts back on.

Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank acco...

Canada's prime minister says police will also be given "more tools" to imprison or fine demonstrators.

Edited July 20Jul 20 by BritManToo

6 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I can't because they don't have digital ID ........ yet.

It's a plan for control of citizens in the future.

So, no facts. no evidence, just your tin foil hat brigade pointless thoughts!

42 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Please provide an example with sources!

I assume that your down arrow(disagree) means that you have no facts and no scources!

35 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Canada, they turned off the bank accounts of striking lorry drivers. 2022 ....... now in 2026 they're thinking of turning their accounts back on.

Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank acco...

Canada's prime minister says police will also be given "more tools" to imprison or fine demonstrators.

That was possible irrespective of whether (digital) ID cards existed.

3 hours ago, RayC said:

That was possible irrespective of whether (digital) ID cards existed.

I don't want digital id

You seem to like the idea, and I have no interest in trying to control what you do.

Can you tell me why you want to control what I do?

With all the hacking, scams and cyberattacks, it's totally foolish and dangerous to push one's citizens ID's on digital. Starmer really did add up his blunders now.

Key Risks with UK Digital ID

Even in its scaled-back form, critics (Big Brother Watch, Privacy International, MPs like David Davis) highlight legitimate concerns:

Security/Hacking: Central components like One Login have faced whistleblower reports of vulnerabilities (hundreds of thousands flagged, including critical ones), poor compliance with cyber standards, and past government breaches (e.g., MoD, Afghan data). A successful hack could expose biometrics, photos, and linked data for millions — a "honeypot" target for ransomware or state actors.

Privacy and Surveillance Creep ("Function Creep"): Starts voluntary/convenient but could expand to more services, banking, travel, or private sector use. Usage tracking or linking via unique identifiers risks profiling. Decentralized elements help, but poor implementation could enable de facto surveillance.

Exclusion: Digital divide affects elderly, low-income, rural, or tech-illiterate people (no smartphone, poor connectivity, distrust). Could disadvantage them in jobs, services, or benefits.

Data Misuse and Mission Creep: Third-party involvement, future policy shifts, or integration with other databases (health, finance) could erode civil liberties. Historical UK data scandals fuel distrust.

Cost and Effectiveness: Questionable ROI; may not significantly curb issues like illegal working if enforcement is weak.

Government counters with privacy-by-design, encryption, user consent for sharing, and compliance with data laws. It's nowhere near mandatory national ID cards of old proposals.

China-Style Controls (leftist governments love this):

China's system revolves around real-name registration (mandatory linking of online/offline activity to national ID), extensive biometric surveillance (CCTV with facial recognition, phone tracking), and the Social Credit System (SCS) — a fragmented but expanding set of local/national blacklists, scores, and incentives tied to behavior.

Not one nationwide "score" for everyone (media myths exaggerated this; it's more business-focused with local pilots varying widely). But it integrates financial, legal, social, and political data.

Controls: Low scores or blacklisting can restrict travel (high-speed rail/flights), loans, jobs, schools, internet access, or even hotel stays. Data from WeChat/Alipay, cameras, and apps feeds enforcement. New centralized internet ID further links online behavior.

Scope: Rewards "good" behavior (volunteering, compliance); punishes dissent, jaywalking, debt, "spreading rumors," or moral/political infractions. Heavier on officials/businesses in some areas. Enables rapid social/political control.

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I don't want digital id

You seem to like the idea, and I have no interest in trying to control what you do.

Can you tell me why you want to control what I do?

Your objection is "because the totalitarian UK state will turn your entire life off for one dodgy FB posting". Frankly, that is ridiculous. However, if the UK government did want "to turn your life off", it doesn't need the introduction of digital ID cards to do so.

In any event, the proposal was amended so that the scheme would not be compulsory and you would be free to opt out. Why don't you allow me to opt-in?

12 hours ago, RayC said:

I really don't understand why people in the UK object to ID cards so vehemently.

The objections arise for both cultural and historical reasons that related to relationship between citizens and the state.

The UK has had national ID during war time, but it was an emergency war power that was abandoned at the end of the war.

A common refrain is “citizens choose the government, the government doesn’t choose the citizens”.

An alternative, deeply routed cultural and legal principal is, if you are legally going about your own business, who you are and what you are doing is nobody else’s business.

However, there are other issues at play, in particular the use of ‘wedge issues’ to ferment division in society.

Interestingly, those claiming a totalitarian Government might use digital ID to control citizens, use digital ID to switch off their rights are frequently the same people demanding the UK leave the ECHR and that the UK Government will be the safe guardian of citizens rights.

Two diametrically opposing wedge issues frequently found rattling around in the same head.

I personally see both the advantages and the disadvantages. I have a very vivid memory of being assigned to a duty post in Singapore, after arriving and registering with the Singapore government I had to wait a few days for my ID to show up.

During this time I was unable to register a new phone, internet service, sign a rental contract, buy a season travel ticket, the list goes on. I was effectively a ‘non-person’.

The very real risk of Digital ID is that those not entitled to register or unable to register for reasons of age, ability, become ‘non-persons’ open to abuse and manipulation by criminal gangs and criminal individuals.

It’s one of those ideas that look great on paper but that are fraught with serious risks.

1 hour ago, RayC said:

In any event, the proposal was amended so that the scheme would not be compulsory and you would be free to opt out. Why don't you allow me to opt-in?

The battle over the right to work past the age of 65 comes to mind.

It started as extending the right to those who wished to do so.

14 hours ago, RayC said:

I really don't understand why people in the UK object to ID cards so vehemently.

We can add that to the ever growing list of things you really don't understand.

10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I don't want digital id

You seem to like the idea, and I have no interest in trying to control what you do.

Can you tell me why you want to control what I do?

Because he's a radical leftist. He thinks it is the job of the state to control you, your children, your children's future children.

Of course he supports digital ID.

The thinks Orwell's 1984 is an instruction manual.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Because he's a radical leftist. He thinks it is the job of the state to control you, your children, your children's future children.

Of course he supports digital ID.

The thinks Orwell's 1984 is an instruction manual.

I was trying to get him to say WHY ......... I suspect he doesn't know himself.

It's like the COVID pro-vaxxers, they insist we have it as well as them.

Lefties don't really think much about anything, it's just parroting the idealogy.