Big Brother Watch issues warning on “Checkpoint Britain” in new report

Within days of coming to power after the last General Election, Keir Starmer’s Labour Government committed to not implementing a digital ID scheme. Now, the Government seems to be on the brink of change and (according to Big Brother Watch) “forcing every adult in the UK” into a mass surveillance infrastructure that will “gather troves of sensitive information and insert the state into everyday interactions”.

Big Brother Watch asserts that: “No-one voted for a digital ID scheme and the Government has no clear mandate to implement one. Yet the Government seems intent on fundamentally changing the population’s relationship with the state without even awaiting the findings of the Home Affairs Committee’s ongoing inquiry into digital ID systems.”

In its report, Big Brother Watch examines how mandatory digital ID would turn the UK into the kind of ‘papers, please’ society that the British public has always rejected. The report lays out in detail how a digital ID system could work, how the Government could mandate it for a range of public services, the “devastating impact” it would exert on privacy and civil liberties and why the clear majority of the British public is right to distrust the Government’s ability to keep digital ID data safe.

The report includes independent polling commissioned by Big Brother Watch through YouGov, duly showing that 63% of those individuals surveyed don’t trust the Government to keep their digital ID data secure. The polling also found that worries over cyber attacks and threats posed to privacy are the most prevalent concerns associated with a mandatory digital ID system.

Key report findings 

At their worst, suggests Big Brother Watch, digital ID systems can enable population-wide surveillance, infringe on civil liberties, monitor, predict or influence individuals’ decisions, identify individuals or groups for targeted interventions and facilitate the tracking, persecution or differential treatment of marginalised groups.

According to Big Brother Watch, there’s little evidence to support the Government’s claim that digital ID would deter illegal immigration or employment fraud, in tandem with many good reasons to believe that mandatory digital ID would burden law-abiding citizens and businesses.

No matter what’s promised at the outset, Big Brother Watch suggests that, once in place, a digital ID system is highly likely to be used beyond its initial stated purposes. The Government is already considering proposals that would require digital ID for right-to-work/right-to-rent checks. Other reporting suggests that an option under consideration would expand further into everyday interactions such as voting online, signing contracts, paying bills and shopping.

There are “serious doubts” about the Government’s ability to run an “effective and efficient” digital ID scheme and prevent the “system failures and inaccuracies” that have plagued the eVisa system. “There is also significant doubt about the Government’s ability to protect the vast amounts of personal data collected in a digital ID scheme.”

Big Brother Watch commented: “Keir Starmer’s Government is selling digital ID as a means to tackle a popular political goal without evidence that it will work or assurances that digital ID will not become required for many functions and activities of everyday life. What we do know is that any mandatory digital ID system created by a Government intent on deterring illegal immigration will inevitably create infrastructure that will usher in a new era of mass surveillance and cause irreversible harm to the privacy rights and civil liberties of the entire population.”

Dangerous red line 

Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch, explained: “We are alarmed by the recent escalation in the Labour Government’s moves towards adopting a mandatory digital ID scheme. Voters have had no say in the matter, nor has Parliament, yet we are being marched increasingly closer to a dangerous red line beyond which our civil liberties can never fully recover.”

Vincent continued: “The notion that digital ID will provide a ‘magic bullet’ solution for unauthorised immigration is ludicrous. It will not stop small boat crossings and it will not deter those intent on using non-legal means of entering the country from doing so. Digital ID will create a huge burden for the largely law-abiding 60 million people who already live here and insert the state into many aspects of our everyday lives.”

Further, Vincent stated: “The British people have a long and proud history of rejecting mandatory ID and we shoud reject this latest attempt at its introduction as well. The stakes for our privacy rights have never been higher.”

Sir David Davis MP explained: “Digital ID cards may sound modern and efficient, but they are a profoundly dangerous idea. Claims that they will tackle illegal immigration are misleading. They will not. That is a fig leaf for a policy that risks eroding our fundamental freedoms.”

Davis added: “This is not about security. It’s about control. A centralised digital ID system would hand the state unprecedented power over its citizens. Worse still, no system is immune to failure. Time and again, both Governments and tech giants have failed to protect personal data. If Meta and Microsoft cannot secure it, what chance does Whitehall have?”

In addition, Davis went on to comment: “Digital IDs will not stop illegal immigration, but they will undermine privacy, increase the risk of data breaches and weaken the rights of law-abiding Britons. That failure will be permanent and the damage to people’s rights will be irreversible. Long after the reason for this policy is forgotten, it will continue to put our private information at risk from hackers, criminals and over-mighty Governments.”

Recipe for privacy intrusion 

Baroness Shami Chakrabarti said: “I can see why tech companies are salivating at the prospect of mandatory digital ID. The public benefits are more opaque.

No asylum seeker will be deterred by this bureaucracy. There are already passports for travel and National Insurance numbers for work. A single non-purpose specific compulsory identifier is a recipe for privacy intrusion and race discrimination in every corner of our lives.”

In conclusion, Chakrabarti observed: “Hackers will rejoice and anyone who believes in the infallibility of technology should have the Postmasters tattooed on their heart.”