The proposal for compulsory digital ID cards strikes at the heart of what it means to be British (Starmer to unveil digital ID cards in plan set to ignite civil liberties row, 25 September). Our unwritten constitution rests on the hard-won principle that we are citizens, not subjects of the government. Free people who are not required to carry papers at the demand of authority – an authority that is our servant, not our master. At present, the state may ask us for identification, but it cannot compel us. That distinction is not a quibble of law but a line in the sand – it defines the relationship between people and power.
Britain has long stood apart from continental traditions of state surveillance. The freedom to go about one’s business without having to show papers has always been more than a convenience; it is a quiet assertion of dignity, liberty and trust in the people. To surrender that would not be a mere technical change, but a constitutional rupture. We should resist it with all the clarity and passion such a betrayal deserves.
Dorian Kelly
Colchester, Essex
Your report says “Tony Blair’s plans for ID cards were abandoned in the 2000s” – this is not quite right. The Identity Cards Act received royal assent in 2006. Steps were then taken to implement it, including issuing cards (I used mine instead of a passport on various occasions). Jacqui Smith, the then home secretary, announced in 2008 that by 2014-15, 90% of all foreign nationals in the country would have been issued with a card.
However, the first act of Theresa May when she became home secretary in 2010 was to repeal the legislation, abandon ID cards and set up a photocall to physically destroy the hard disk containing the data on the national identity register. Her decision severely weakened this country’s capacity to control immigration, with the disastrous consequences we see today. I am delighted that this government is intending to re-establishing a modernised digital system.
Charles Clarke
Home secretary, 2004-06
As a retired director of IT, I find myself screaming when I hear politicians misrepresent how a digital ID would work. It is clear that they have only a rudimentary grasp of IT when they talk about “carrying a digital ID on your smartphone”. This is not how the system would work.
What is proposed is for anyone with the right to live and work in the UK to have their biometric details (typically, photograph and fingerprints) held on a government database. This already happens in many cases (eg when applying for a passport or a work visa).
As well as the risks of holding such data centrally, there is the issue of how the data will be accessed. Yes, you might be able to carry a copy on a smartphone, but how secure is your phone? A lot of people sacrifice security for convenience. Yes, an employer might need to access the database, but how will that be controlled? This is a can of worms and I wish politicians could explain it accurately.
John Robinson
Deal, Kent
Why does Keir Starmer not mention the most important advantage of ID cards, that they make it easier and simpler to vote? The framing of the issue in terms of controlling immigration rather than strengthening democracy speaks volumes about how far his government has abandoned the last vestiges of socialism. Even when it does the right thing, it is for the wrong reasons.
Andrew Halliday
Bremen, Germany
Here in France, where I’ve lived since 1997, ID cards are a major convenience. They’re invaluable when registering a car, dealing with banks, applying for loans, entering hospital and many other everyday situations. Over the border in Spain, hotel receptionists ask for them during check-in. Nobody here understands the paranoia in a Britain. But our ID cards are physical. If I was Keir Starmer, I’d introduce paper ones and forget digital.
Martin Castellan
Léran, Ariège, France
I doubt unscrupulous employers hiring illegal migrants, or the migrants themselves, are going to be deterred by a national identity card that seeks to stop both parties from breaking the law. They already know they’re doing that. It’s called the “shadow economy” for a reason.
Mike Galvin
Winchcombe, Gloucestershire
I assume those whose opposition to a digital ID is based on the threat posed by having their data stored on a central computer system will no longer be visiting EU countries once they are forced to provide fingerprints and a photograph to travel to those countries (Will the EU’s new fingerprint entry system cause gridlock? The Guardian tried it out, 27 September).
Mike Lowcock
Sandbach, Cheshire
Why the fuss about ID cards? I still have my national registration identity card, issued in 1943 and signed by my father. I treasure it.
Helen Evans
Ruthin, Denbighshire
Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
