On September 26, 2025, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to unveil one of the most ambitious and contentious digital reforms in recent UK history: a mandatory government-issued digital identity card for every working adult in Britain. The so-called "Brit card" scheme, which will require a change in law to implement, marks a bold attempt to address illegal migration and modernize the country’s approach to identity verification. The move, however, has reignited fierce debate over civil liberties, privacy, and the practicalities of such a sweeping digital overhaul.
The announcement comes at a time of mounting pressure on the government to take decisive action on migration, with record numbers of small boat crossings and an asylum backlog that stubbornly remains above 75,000. According to reports from The Independent and Reuters, ministers are looking to Estonia’s digital ID card system as a model, hoping to replicate its success in streamlining public services and combating illegal work in the so-called "black economy."
Prime Minister Starmer, who has previously stated that an identity scheme could play an "important part" in reducing the incentive for unauthorized entry to the UK, will set out the details of the plan in a speech at a policy conference. As reported by Politico, the government’s goal is clear: make it much harder for those without the legal right to work to find employment, thereby reducing the pull factors that drive irregular migration.
The digital ID proposal is not without precedent. More than two decades ago, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Labour government attempted to introduce a physical identity card system, only to see it scrapped by Gordon Brown amid a storm of opposition over privacy and cost. Now, Blair himself, through the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), is playing a pivotal role in lobbying for the digital revival of his original vision. "How we experience government could be about to transform, for the better," said Alexander Iosad, TBI’s director of government innovation, in comments reported by The Independent. "Not only can digital ID help us to tackle illegal migration, but done correctly and responsibly, it can open the door to a whole new model of services that come to you when you need them."
Public sentiment appears to be shifting in favor of digital identification. A December 2024 poll by More in Common found that 53% of respondents supported a universal digital ID system, with 25% strongly in favor and only 19% opposed. More recently, a survey conducted by the Tony Blair Institute in September 2025, sampling over 2,000 adults, showed that 62% would support a digital ID paired with an app for reporting local issues like potholes or missed bin collections. These numbers suggest a growing appetite for technological solutions to everyday problems—at least in theory.
Supporters of the Brit card argue that the benefits extend far beyond migration control. Lord Blunkett, former Labour home secretary and architect of the original ID card scheme, welcomed the revival, stating, "Age verification to protect our children and young people; avoidance of exploitation by organised criminals abusing people in the sub-economy; acting as a deterrent to unauthorised entry across the Channel and protection from fraud are just some of the benefits which could arise from a well-implemented programme." Blunkett emphasized that the current patchwork of digital documentation poses a greater threat to privacy and security than a unified, universal system.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has also thrown her weight behind the initiative, recalling her support for the Labour government’s ID card bill in the 2000s. "I have a longstanding position of my own, which those who are familiar with my political track record will know that that is something that I’ve always supported," she told broadcasters earlier this month.
Yet, for all the promises of convenience and security, the proposal faces stiff resistance from civil liberties groups and segments of the political spectrum. Eight organizations, including Liberty, Article 19, Connected by Data, and the Runnymede Trust, have warned that a mandatory digital ID risks "shifting the balance of power towards the state with dangerous implications for our security, rights and freedoms." In a letter to Starmer, they argued, "Mandatory digital ID is highly unlikely to achieve the government’s objective of tackling unauthorised immigration. The proposed schemes fundamentally misunderstand the ‘pull factors’ that drive migration to the UK and would do very little to tackle criminal people-smuggling gangs or employers and landlords who operate ‘off the books’. Instead, it would push unauthorised migrants further into the shadows, into more precarious work and unsafe housing."
Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch, echoed these concerns, warning that a digital ID rollout could be "uniquely harmful to privacy, equality and civil liberties." Her organization has already gathered more than 101,000 signatures on a petition urging Starmer to abandon the Brit card plan.
There’s also skepticism from the political opposition. Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, is expected to oppose the measure on civil liberties grounds, much as they did with the Online Safety Act. According to The Spectator, this opposition is already fueling a heated online debate, with the government poised to use it as evidence that Reform is unwilling to take "tough action" on migration. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, meanwhile, has struck a more cautious tone, telling his party’s conference that while the policy deserves scrutiny, "times have changed," and it may warrant reconsideration.
Cost is another source of anxiety. The Tony Blair Institute estimates the digital ID system would cost £1 billion to establish and £100 million annually to maintain, while some industry estimates run as high as £2 billion for a full national rollout. An alternative proposal for the BritCard, advanced by the Labour Together thinktank, has been costed at between £140 million and £400 million, with running costs up to £10 million a year. The government, for its part, insists that spending will be kept low, with plans to use the government’s own digital services department and smaller UK firms rather than handing out "gigantic, hundreds of millions of pounds contracts" to tech giants.
There are also concerns about digital exclusion, especially among older Britons. Age UK estimates that around 1.7 million people over 74 do not use the internet, raising the specter of marginalization for some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens. Cybersecurity experts warn that any centralized national database could become a prime target for hackers, referencing recent cyber-attacks on major UK institutions as cautionary tales.
Britain’s fraught history with large-scale digital projects—often plagued by delays, cost overruns, and technical failures—adds another layer of uncertainty. Despite these challenges, Starmer’s government appears determined to push forward, betting that the promise of a more secure, efficient, and responsive state will outweigh the risks.
As the debate heats up, one thing is clear: the question of digital identity in Britain is no longer a relic of the past. It is a live issue, set to shape the country’s social contract, its approach to migration, and the balance between security and liberty for years to come.
