Britain is once again at the crossroads of a heated debate about national identity, security, and civil liberties. The Labour government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, is actively considering the introduction of a mandatory digital ID card system—dubbed the BritCard—as part of a broader push to tighten border controls and address rising concerns over illegal migration. This proposal, however, has ignited fierce opposition from civil rights campaigners, privacy advocates, and a significant segment of the public, who warn of its far-reaching consequences for both migrants and the wider population.
On September 3, 2025, anti-racist and civil rights groups sounded the alarm over Starmer’s plan, which would require everyone in the UK to use a digital ID to prove their identity for employment and to access essential public services such as the National Health Service (NHS). According to Socialist Worker, campaigners argue that such a policy would disproportionately impact migrants and refugees, making their already precarious lives even harder. Samira Ali, national organiser for Stand Up To Racism (SUTR), stated bluntly, “We should treat these people with compassion, not as political pawns.”
Currently, asylum seekers in Britain are banned from working and must survive on just £49.18 per week per person—an amount that drops to a mere £8 per week if they are placed in accommodation with meals provided. Ali criticized the government’s approach, saying, “The government should allow refugees to work. It should not be cracking down on people trying to make a living when they have to survive on so little from the government.” She further accused Labour of “clutching at straws” in an attempt to outflank Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party, warning that such measures “give confidence to the far right at a dangerous moment.”
The Labour government’s interest in digital IDs is not happening in a vacuum. According to a poll reported by Biometric Update, 57 percent of 1,021 Labour Party newsletter readers support the introduction of a digital ID card system, while 30 percent remain opposed. The policy has also found increasing favor among members of other parties, including the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. Lisa Smart, Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesperson, recently told her party’s Autumn Conference, “We shouldn’t dismiss the potential benefits. If done properly, digital identity could make it easier for people to prove who they are securely and quickly.” However, Smart emphasized that her party would prefer digital IDs to remain voluntary, marking a notable shift from the party’s historic opposition to compulsory ID cards.
One of the main arguments in favor of digital IDs among UK lawmakers is their potential to help address illegal migration and the underground economy. The so-called “small boats crisis” has dominated headlines throughout the summer, with over 29,000 people arriving in the UK by crossing the English Channel so far in 2025—a 36 percent increase from the previous year, according to PA News Agency. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper recently announced the rollout of digital ID and biometric kits, saying, “We are rolling out digital ID and biometric kits so immigration enforcement can check on the spot whether someone has a right to work or a right to be in the UK.”
Despite these intentions, rights groups remain deeply skeptical. Liberty, a prominent civil liberties organization, warned that digital ID cards “would pose a host of wider human rights questions.” Gracie Bradley of Liberty argued that a new scheme would be “even more intrusive, insecure and discriminatory” than the Labour government’s failed 2006 attempt to introduce ID cards, which was scrapped by the incoming Coalition government in 2010. Sam Grant, Liberty’s director of external relations, noted, “There are many countries that have mandatory ID systems. It’s been shown there is no clear correlation between irregular migrant population, underground economies and ID policies.”
Rebecca Vincent, Interim Director of Big Brother Watch, was even more direct, telling the Daily Mail, “While Downing Street is scrambling to be seen as doing something about illegal immigration, we are sleepwalking into a dystopian nightmare where the entire population will be forced through myriad digital checkpoints to go about our everyday lives.” Vincent added, “Mandatory digital ID is simply not the magic-bullet solution that is often promised to tackle illegal immigration or other societal issues. It will not stop small boat crossings, but it will create a burden on the already law-abiding population to prove our right to be here.”
Opposition is not limited to advocacy groups. A new online petition, titled ‘Do not introduce Digital ID cards,’ has garnered over 15,000 signatures as of September 4, 2025. Petition creator Maxim Sutcliff argues that digital ID cards would be “a step towards mass surveillance and digital control” and that “no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system.” The petition has already crossed the 10,000-signature threshold, requiring a formal government response, and if it reaches 100,000, it will be considered for debate in Parliament.
Downing Street, for its part, has been careful not to commit to a full rollout of compulsory national ID cards, but has signaled a willingness to “look at what works” in tackling illegal migration. Pat McFadden, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, referenced the potential applications of digital ID in the immigration system, emphasizing the government’s focus on addressing “pull factors” and cracking down on illegal working. “We’ve made significant progress when it comes to illegal working, surged arrests by 50 percent, but there’s more to do in this space,” a spokesperson told the PA News Agency.
The debate over digital ID cards is set to take center stage in a televised political debate on immigration scheduled for September 10, 2025, on Sky News. Representatives from the UK Government, the Tories, Reform UK, and the Liberal Democrats will discuss measures to tackle migration, including the contentious digital ID proposal. Zia Yusuf will represent Reform UK, while Lisa Smart will speak for the Liberal Democrats.
Some critics see the digital ID proposal as part of a broader trend of hardening immigration policies. Labour has also floated plans to house migrants in portacabins on industrial or ex-military sites to clear out hotels—a response to a wave of anti-refugee protests led by far-right groups. The Socialist Worker warns that such measures “give further legitimacy to the lie that migrants and refugees are a problem or drain on resources,” and could embolden fascists and far-right activists organizing violent protests, including a planned march by Tommy Robinson in London on September 13.
Even among those who support tighter border controls, there is skepticism about the effectiveness of digital IDs. Robert Jenrick, Tory justice spokesman, told the Daily Mail, “Most employers who are employing individuals illegally are doing so knowingly. Asking them to check ID cards rather than the current checks that they are already obliged to do is not going to make a blind bit of difference to illegal migration.”
The UK’s flirtation with national ID cards is not new. Former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair’s attempt to introduce a similar scheme in 2006 was ultimately abandoned, a point often cited by today’s critics who argue that the risks to privacy and civil liberties far outweigh any potential benefits.
As the political debate heats up and public petitions gain momentum, the fate of the BritCard—and the broader question of how Britain balances security, migration, and individual freedoms—remains uncertain. What is clear is that the issue has struck a nerve, prompting a national conversation about what kind of society Britain wants to be in an increasingly digital age.
