The Prime Minister U-turns on the controversial policy, but opponents remain sceptical.
In September 2025, Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the introduction of a centralised system of Digital ID.
According to the official government scheme explainer, it will make accessing vital government services easier and “to send a clear message that if you come here illegally, you will not be able to work, deterring people from making dangerous journeys.”
Since then, the government has announced the scheme will no longer be mandatory, after facing significant opposition, making it voluntary instead.
Proving the right to work will remain mandatory, but using documents like biometric passports, with the intention of moving fully online by 2029.
The idea launched a wave of recurring protests against a scheme many found an “Orwellian overreach of state power.”
One of the main concerns regarding the introduction of Digital ID is extensive access to private information. Many fear that if the government of the day becomes radical and wishes to penalise the public for certain behaviours, unrestricted access to this much private data will facilitate authoritarianism.
Amnesty International called the UK’s Digital ID scheme a “serious concern” that will put people’s vital informations at risk.
Javier Ruiz Diaz, Amnesty International UK’s technology and human rights lead, said: “This is a dangerous overreaction by the Government that puts the rights of all people in the UK at risk.”
Graeme Stewart, head of public sector at Check Point Software Technologies, called the ‘BritCard’ a potential “honeypot” for cybercriminals.
Some protestors speculate that factors like one’s carbon footprint could be used to determine one’s position in society, with the potential to penalise the choices in their daily lives, comparing it to China’s Social Credit System, which is used to evaluate and track the ‘trustworthiness’ of businesses, individuals, and government institutions.
We spoke with Montgomery Toms, an activist who has been campaigning against digital ID from the very beginning, and is an avid advocate against government surveillance.
Sounding the alarm about Digital ID since before its official announcement, being a fierce opponent of the mandatory COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccinations, he claims he saw Digital ID coming before the scheme’s official introduction.
“I had anticipated something like this would be put in place during COVID-19 and the lockdowns. When they introduced ‘vaccine passports’ you had to carry on your phone, I started to research what precedent that could set.”
Seeing as illegal migration is another issue he is passionate about, involving himself in a recent altercation over a sign advocating for mass deportation, we inquired if he thought mandatory Digital IDs had merit in solving that issue. “No, just deport them. There’s no need to surveil the British people due to a minority of legal migrants, because it doesn’t solve the problem.”
David Rennie, a former Home Office official, now working at Orchestrating Identity, a company performing the ‘right to work checks’, told the BBC that he did not believe the plan would have any bearing on people coming to this country illegally, “It’s the black economy; by its nature, they’re not performing right to work checks.”
We asked Montgomery whether Starmer’s recent announcement is a win for the fight against digital ID, “Starmer’s saying it’s a U-turn, but it’s not. There’s still ‘OneLogin’, a centralised single log-in portal to government websites,” he said.
“I do think this is a win, but I’m suspicious; I feel like it’s a way to signal to a lot of people that Digital ID is over, but it’s not. What I’d say is: stay vigilant, and don’t take the foot off the gas.”
So, what would he see as an adequate resolution: “Full cancellation of Digital ID, as well as reversing the damage that has already been done in the form of OneLogin.”
Indeed, following assessments, industry experts have suggested that the OneLogin system “lacks rigid security measures” after finding security breaches such as overseas admin access, insecure logins to live environments, and more than half a million unresolved vulnerabilities.
Many acknowledge that citizens less adept at technological use will have been at a major disadvantage, cutting off the ‘digitally excluded’ from the labour market.
The Digital Poverty Alliance estimates that with 4.5 million adults not owning smartphones, many vulnerable individuals will be excluded from work and essential services, while Age UK warns that “2.4 million digitally excluded older people are at risk of being left behind in an increasingly digital world.”
Dan*, a 21-year-old protest attendee, shares his concerns, “Under the name of convenience, many evil things are done. I think the current levels of immigration are way too high, but I’m sceptical as to how effective Digital ID will be in curbing them.
“There will always be jobs that are cash in hand. Most people think we’re over-exaggerating, but many people see that this is a bit off. When you have distractions like doom scrolling on social media, it’s easy to underestimate the extent of the issue.”
An official government petition against the rollout of digital ID reached just under three million signatures, but has since been deactivated.
According to a recent government update, when they are introduced in 2029, Digital IDs will be optional. As it stands, it will be possible for supporters looking to create more convenient access to government services, without putting less adept users of technology at risk of vulnerability, as well as avoiding claims of an authoritarian approach.
According to a government spokesperson who was quoted in The Guardian: “We are committed to mandatory digital right to work checks. We have always been clear that details on the digital ID scheme will be set out following a full public consultation, which will launch shortly.”
All images by Masha Gaysynska.