The government has ruled out the introduction of digital ID cards.
In the days following Labour’s victory in the General Election, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told Times Radio ID that cards were not part of the government’s plans.
Former Labour Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair had urged the take up of identity cards, saying they could help control immigration. He brought in legislation for compulsory identity cards when he was in office but the scheme was scrapped by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government.
Writing in the Sunday Times, Blair said: “We need a plan to control immigration. If we don’t have rules, we get prejudices.
“In office, I believed the best solution was a system of identity so that we know precisely who has a right to be here.
“With, again, technology, we should move as the world is moving to digital ID. If not, new border controls will have to be highly effective.”
A long time proponent of digital IDs, Blair has called for everyone in Britain to be given an ID incorporating their passport, driving licence, tax records, qualifications and right to work. He said it would be the cornerstone of a “technology revolution”.
Last week both trade bodies and business leaders signed an open letter urging the new government to recommit to moving forward with digital verification in the UK as a matter of urgency. It said The adoption and use of Digital ID could provide an additional £800 million to the UK economy every year .
However, when asked if she could rule out introducing digital ID cards, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said ID cards were not in the party’s election manifesto. She said: “That’s not our approach.”
Instead, Cooper said the government was setting up a new enforcement and returns unit, as well as targeting people-smuggling gangs to prevent small boats crossings, reported the BBC.
Asked about the possibility of introducing digital ID cards, Reynolds told Times Radio: “We can rule that out, that’s not something that’s part of our plans.”
Opponents of identity cards have raised concerns about the potential impact on civil liberties and what they see as unnecessary data collection by the state.
