Digital ID will ‘cut the faff’, Starmer says in bid to reverse public scepticism

Sir Keir Starmer has said digital IDs will “cut the faff” as he sought to win back public support for the scheme.

The Prime Minister insisted the identification system would be voluntary and never be needed to get into hospital amid concerns about its potential impact on accessing public services, civil liberties and data protection.

The proposed digital IDs announced by Sir Keir last month, to be introduced by 2029, would be mandatory for anyone working in the UK as part of efforts to clamp down on illegal working and therefore curb illegal migration.

But he was keen to stress that “apart from the right to work”, it “won’t be mandatory”.

The Prime Minister told staff at a Barclays branch in Brighton on Thursday that digital ID would “really help” with security for customers after they told him they deal with victims of scams and fraud every day.

He said customers at the bank had told him they were “really excited about it” and had relayed “everyday examples where you can just cut the faff”.

The Labour leader also told the BBC: “You’ll never need ID to get into a hospital or anything like that.

“And for people who simply don’t want it, well, they don’t need it, apart from the right to work, because we do need to stop people working illegally in our country to do that.”

He said “it won’t be the case” that digital ID could end up being used for surveillance.

“The idea of having ID on your phone is not that far removed from having bank accounts on your phone or any other apps that people have on their phones,” he told the broadcaster.

But he admitted he did not know how much the proposed scheme would cost, saying that until the completion of a consultation exercise, “we won’t know the full cost”.

“Most of the evidence from other countries shows that actually saves money because it stops fraud,” he added.

In a video posted to X, Sir Keir said that Barclays customers he had spoken to were “really up for it” and “I think once you understand just how much easier it’ll make life, so many more people will be too”.

More than 2.9 million people have signed a petition against the measures and net support for digital ID cards fell from 35% in the early summer to minus 14% after Sir Keir’s September announcement, according to polling by More in Common.

The Prime Minister has given central Government control of the plans.

In a written ministerial statement, he said: “In order to deliver this cross-government priority, the Cabinet Office will have overall responsibility of the new digital identity scheme, including policy development, legislation and strategic oversight.”

It will work alongside other departments including the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, which will be responsible for the technical design, build and delivery.

Every British citizen and legal resident will be entitled to a digital ID free of charge, Downing Street said.

This will allow those without passports or driving licences to access jobs and services more easily.

It will also spare people the need to look for old paperwork or pay for private verification services when trying to rent a home or apply for a mortgage, and protect against fraud.

A public consultation will launch by the end of the year, according to No 10.

Green Party MP Sian Berry said: “The fact that the Prime Minister has been forced into a significant change in tone on mandatory digital ID, shows he cannot ignore the kind of outcry this has caused from millions of citizens.

“But vague assurances will not resolve the alarming privacy and civil liberties at stake. We hear him claiming the system will be just for employment purposes but in the next breath he talks about access to the NHS. The details of the proposals really matter and the public needs to be fully informed and be listened to if Britain once again rejects this worrying proposal.”

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Max Wilkinson said: “Keir Starmer is trying to put lipstick on a very expensive pig.

“Relaunching this scheme for the second time this month won’t change the fact it is intrusive, expensive and unnecessary.”