ID cards at long last

stewaris

I agree #Growstuff but why would introducing ID cards stop the employment of people without NI or the proposed new ID. They do not ask for NINI number so why would they concern themselves with the new ID system. Employers who want to work that way won't ask for the new ID card anymore than they would ask for their NI number.

Laws need to be enforced and the employers need to be raided and to show that they have requested the correct authorisation. It's not rocket science.

Agree!

stewaris

I agree #Growstuff but why would introducing ID cards stop the employment of people without NI or the proposed new ID. They do not ask for NINI number so why would they concern themselves with the new ID system. Employers who want to work that way won't ask for the new ID card anymore than they would ask for their NI number.

I posted above the penalties imposed on employers in France who are caught employing people without ID. They are very severe, and act as an effective deterrent.

ID cards are so necessary. My sister doesn’t drive, so no driving license. Her Passport expired years ago. This is exactly why ID cards are useful.

I have lived in other countries and had to have an ID card and a residencia etc, so have used them before, and as others have said these days there is so much that can be known about you already, the actual cards wont make much difference in my opinion. However I was asked if I would put my medical things on the internet . I could see the advantage , in case of an accident, or showing your latest medication or allergies etc. But having run communications systems, I refuse to put my details on line, simply because the security and level of up to date safety back ups are so poor, out of date, and probably a child of 10 could hack into them, I will not be using this idea. As we are seeing recently there are so many scams and hackers around , who are now gettting your information from poorly secured companies and we only have to look at the last couple of days where we have LandRovers etc in a total mess, childrens photos and information being held to ransome etc to see why you could be giving access to much that is private.

So far (just checked) 1,493,461 signatures on a petition against ID cards.
Wonder if they voted for Brexit too?
I’m in favour of ID cards, so I’m not signing the petition, but I’m counting up the GN’s who might have, then I’ll have a look a Mumsnet.

Arto1s

ID cards are so necessary. My sister doesn’t drive, so no driving license. Her Passport expired years ago. This is exactly why ID cards are useful.

Your sister hasn't renewed her passport so we all need to get an ID card. If she's not working she likely won't get one anyway.

This is an interesting historical paper from academic Jon Agar. I can’t see a date on it it but his reference to New Labour has proposed identity cards first as tools for combating underage drinking, then, as a tool against identity theft, illegal working and benefit fraud (the 'entitlement card'), and, more recently, as a tool against terrorism. effectively dates it.

historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/identity-cards-in-britain-past-experience-and-policy-implications/

How does what he write there chime with this latest announcement?

Some thoughts.

Reform’s Zia Yusuf repeated describes small boat migrants as “men of fighting age” as if men from disparate countries are forming an insurgent army.

At the recent protest rally organised by Yaxley Lennon, Musk urged people to fight back or die.

Therefore it seems pertinent that British identity card systems have been introduced twice before, between 1915-1919 and 1939-1952.

Agar writes:

The first National Registration was taken during the First World War. The context was a fierce debate raging in the War Cabinet between those ministers willing to consider conscription and those who wanted to continue the policy of voluntarism. The argument turned on knowing the number of men within the population available to fight, and existing statistics were judged to be insufficiently accurate.

On the 29th September 1939, the second National Register was introduced for three specified purposes 'for the duration of the present emergency': co-ordinating national service, national security and the administration of rationing.

One lesson to be drawn from historical experience is that universal registers of personal information are held to be solutions to moral panics, but in operation they are very rarely as effective as their proponents hope.

It seems to me that Starmer has introduced this now in response to the moral panic (from some quarters) over migration.

Agar goes on:

The 1939 Act provided for three administrative applications of the personal data held in the registers (national service, national security and food rationing), but eleven years later thirty-nine government agencies made use of the records. Some of these uses were noted in the last section. Others involved the opening of Post Office Savings Bank accounts, collecting parcels, checking pension claims and routine police inquiries. Theoretically, exceptional disclosure was confined to communication of information relating to serious crime or national security. In practice, requests from government departments and state agencies relating to less serious matters were often granted. Disclosure was powerfully shaped by the culture of discretion that marks the British civil service, and was, of course, entirely free of constraint by data protection laws.

In general, the second identity card system illustrates the phenomenon of 'function creep', where seemingly insignificant further uses are incrementally added until, eventually, the pattern of disclosure and use of personal information is markedly different from that originally declared. Once a universal register was in place, there was a seemingly compelling bureaucratic case for using the information.

The USA keeps a record of party affiliation. Could we end up with that here?

… a technologically-sophisticated card is more likely to be accepted on trust than a very simple card. But since the unfakeable card is unlikely ever to exist, this very trust is problematic: the people and organisations with the means and will to corrupt a … card are precisely the people and organisations it would be most dangerous to trust.

In weighing up the pros and cons of the National Register, the (unnamed) civil servant considered what he or she called the 'totalitarian” argument': 'while it is true that if this country went communist or fascist the National Register would prove a very handy means of finding any individual whom the authorities did not like …

With Reform wanting to deport people with ILTR (who next?), this would be putting a finding tool into their hands. Despite Farage’s claims to be against ID cards (and who can believe what he says from one day to the next?) over half of Reform voters from 2024 are in favour and several well-known Reform names on SM are voicing their support for a scheme.

I would say no to ID cards in case we end up with a fascist government.

Referendum but this time with a wide margin of majority.

What’s with the digital? Why not a proper one ? Tell me all the homeless people and old and sick people have phones. Typical middle class apology for a Labour Party.

nanna8

What’s with the digital? Why not a proper one ? Tell me all the homeless people and old and sick people have phones. Typical middle class apology for a Labour Party.

I suspect most old and sick people do have smartphones. It's patronising to think they don't.

Mollygo

So far (just checked) 1,493,461 signatures on a petition against ID cards.
Wonder if they voted for Brexit too?
I’m in favour of ID cards, so I’m not signing the petition, but I’m counting up the GN’s who might have, then I’ll have a look a Mumsnet.

I'm always astounded by how many GNetters eulogise other countries that have compulsory ID cards but suddenly do a 180 degree uturn when it comes to the UK utilising the same methods..........

I’m working and haven’t got a passport -I don’t want one.
I also don’t drive- I don’t want to.

But I do want to vote at elections.
I’m not saying this is a good reason for the introduction of an ID system in Britain.
I’m in two minds at the moment.

It would provide me with useful proof of “right to work in UK” which my employer of 4 years was asking all employees for last year - it is a global company and wanted to be seen to be compliant with right to work laws.
They gave up in the end. I have never set foot outside of Britain for 50 years. Crazy though that may seem

Without the passport or drivers license there was nothing acceptable.
I even explored this fabled Post Office Pass …useless apparently no wonder it is seldom mentioned - and (of course they know my NINO- they pay me after all) but NINO alone is apparently not enough- and neither is photo of my actual old National Insurance Card now a brown curled up mottled looking slip in an little brown envelope that has never seen the light of day since I left school at 16, same story with my old style medical card that used to have be filled in every time one changed GP. Never EVER been asked for it, not once.
So…we shall see.

Oh and silly me🤦‍♀️ - I forgot the most obvious: My Birth Certificate a short and a long version - it just proves that I was born.
So without those other two biggies still no use.

stewaris

I don't believe for an instant that ID cards will help record the migrants/asylum seekers who are working under the radar. All employers should be asking for a NI number at the start of employment, everybody who is entitled to work already has, and there are still people working on the side. I don't believe for a minute this will help. Currently, the number of signatures on the Govt petition website is standing at 1,271,972. It's been waiting for a debate date for 4 days so a lot of people are pretty incensed about it.

Exactly, the companies who employ them now, don't ask about ID.s

Interesting Guardian article about how ID cards and digital ID actually work in the rest of Europe.
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/26/starmer-id-card-plan-has-caused-upset-but-in-the-eu-the-debate-has-long-been-settled
Especially interesting how so many other countries, including war-torn Ukraine can manage it.

I was going to say how other countries introduced identity papers a long while ago, France (1940), Germany (1951), so the pages of discussion about immigrants in this issue are not the priority reason for the UK to do the same. That's just suiting various people's arguments. The real reasons are far more wider-reaching.

It's regrettable we didn't do this a lot sooner in the UK, because the financial cost of now setting it all up is going to be astronomical, I think I read up to £400million - but in my opinion still very necessary.

I don't think it will happen. It's another of a statement, by KS that won't happen.
How patronising saying not everyone should have an ID card, to get benefits, work etc. On a phone is not much good, we need cards. It just seems too difficult a task for government and as for the people that won't use one, they will when their standard of living is affected, so leave them to it.

I would say no to ID cards in case we end up with a fascist government.

Excellent reason, PaynesGrey

Wasted on Gnetters, though because most of them cling firmly to the belief that fascism doesn’t exist in the UK and never will. 🤔

Once the current panic over immigrants has passed (as it will) what will be the purpose of ID? Apart from it being very convenient for government to have all the information they want on us at their fingertips? And all of it on a desperately unsafe platform.

I'm about to leave France in a few days, and re enter the EU in November. Won't most of that information on me have been already collected in a much bigger way, (EES), so having an identity card is inconsequential?

If it’s inconsequential then it isn’t worth the expense of setting it up and maintaining it. Or the danger of it being misused.

I think I meant inconsequential to me personally, in that it would warrant little attention from me if I'd already been through EES requirements.

But of course, that is maybe a danger in this modern world - that we all become too ready to part with personal details because we seem to do it on a regular basis.

karmalady

Control of the whole population by stealth

Black belt barrister, is worth watching. I have completely changed my mind and signed a petition against digital ID

Black belt barrister is an expert in data protection

www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC7PrWKWrNU

I'm subscribed to him as well - jaw dropping at the way he forensically analyses things bit by bit.....

MaizieD

^I would say no to ID cards in case we end up with a fascist government.^

Excellent reason, PaynesGrey

Wasted on Gnetters, though because most of them cling firmly to the belief that fascism doesn’t exist in the UK and never will. 🤔

Once the current panic over immigrants has passed (as it will) what will be the purpose of ID? Apart from it being very convenient for government to have all the information they want on us at their fingertips? And all of it on a desperately unsafe platform.

Curiously, my impression is that those who would enable a fascist government (and I don't think it's that far away) are in many cases the same people who are most vociferously against ID cards.

PaynesGrey

This is an interesting historical paper from academic Jon Agar. I can’t see a date on it it but his reference to New Labour has proposed identity cards first as tools for combating underage drinking, then, as a tool against identity theft, illegal working and benefit fraud (the 'entitlement card'), and, more recently, as a tool against terrorism. effectively dates it.

historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/identity-cards-in-britain-past-experience-and-policy-implications/

How does what he write there chime with this latest announcement?

Some thoughts.

Reform’s Zia Yusuf repeated describes small boat migrants as “men of fighting age” as if men from disparate countries are forming an insurgent army.

At the recent protest rally organised by Yaxley Lennon, Musk urged people to fight back or die.

Therefore it seems pertinent that British identity card systems have been introduced twice before, between 1915-1919 and 1939-1952.

Agar writes:

The first National Registration was taken during the First World War. The context was a fierce debate raging in the War Cabinet between those ministers willing to consider conscription and those who wanted to continue the policy of voluntarism. The argument turned on knowing the number of men within the population available to fight, and existing statistics were judged to be insufficiently accurate.

On the 29th September 1939, the second National Register was introduced for three specified purposes 'for the duration of the present emergency': co-ordinating national service, national security and the administration of rationing.

One lesson to be drawn from historical experience is that universal registers of personal information are held to be solutions to moral panics, but in operation they are very rarely as effective as their proponents hope.

It seems to me that Starmer has introduced this now in response to the moral panic (from some quarters) over migration.

Agar goes on:

The 1939 Act provided for three administrative applications of the personal data held in the registers (national service, national security and food rationing), but eleven years later thirty-nine government agencies made use of the records. Some of these uses were noted in the last section. Others involved the opening of Post Office Savings Bank accounts, collecting parcels, checking pension claims and routine police inquiries. Theoretically, exceptional disclosure was confined to communication of information relating to serious crime or national security. In practice, requests from government departments and state agencies relating to less serious matters were often granted. Disclosure was powerfully shaped by the culture of discretion that marks the British civil service, and was, of course, entirely free of constraint by data protection laws.

In general, the second identity card system illustrates the phenomenon of 'function creep', where seemingly insignificant further uses are incrementally added until, eventually, the pattern of disclosure and use of personal information is markedly different from that originally declared. Once a universal register was in place, there was a seemingly compelling bureaucratic case for using the information.

The USA keeps a record of party affiliation. Could we end up with that here?

… a technologically-sophisticated card is more likely to be accepted on trust than a very simple card. But since the unfakeable card is unlikely ever to exist, this very trust is problematic: the people and organisations with the means and will to corrupt a … card are precisely the people and organisations it would be most dangerous to trust.

In weighing up the pros and cons of the National Register, the (unnamed) civil servant considered what he or she called the 'totalitarian” argument': 'while it is true that if this country went communist or fascist the National Register would prove a very handy means of finding any individual whom the authorities did not like …

With Reform wanting to deport people with ILTR (who next?), this would be putting a finding tool into their hands. Despite Farage’s claims to be against ID cards (and who can believe what he says from one day to the next?) over half of Reform voters from 2024 are in favour and several well-known Reform names on SM are voicing their support for a scheme.

I would say no to ID cards in case we end up with a fascist government.

Referendum but this time with a wide margin of majority.

Hmmm....the timing of when they were previously introduced - ie at the start of a major war....that will have me thinking on wondering.

Given that right now - it would appear that America has called back all their high-level military bods from across the world (Admirals and Generals) for an "in person" (ie harder to snoop on) meeting in America.

That being their Secretary of War - Pete Hegseth is the one that has called them all back. A disturbing thought and I've seen two speculative reasons as to why they've summonsed them.

1. Being ready to start World War 3 - against Putin.
2. In case 3I/Atlas that is steadily making its way to Earth and looking less and less like a comet and more and more like ET paying us a visit (own personal take on that one being it probably is ET and they're keeping a very close eye currently on this planet with its primitive, warlike people). ET's must feel like they're watching an episode of EastEnders and wondering how on earth (pun...) such a high proportion of people living on Earth are still so primitive. Logical thought does not predominate on Earth.

Hmm......but Britain looking like it might introduce these cards again does make one wonder whether Trump has "tipped the wink" to Starmer's minder that "Better get those cards in place buddy - I'm about to start up another World War". Hence a reason for not having mentioned it (as they should have!) in their manifesto - ie because America wasnt doing that at the time we had our last Election.

I wonder......