Over the past couple of months there has been a great deal of commentary on the Government’s recent announcement that they will be rolling out a mandatory digital identification scheme. I’ve had a flood of correspondence on this - and felt it would be useful to take this chance to make my position clear.
I very much share the concerns which have been expressed from across the House of Commons that this policy sadly amounts to little more than a cynical gimmick to distract from the Government’s recent scandals and seeming inability to counter the ongoing illegal immigration crisis.
The Prime Minister seemingly wants us to believe that a mandatory digital ID card will have a meaningful impact on the scale of immigration into this country. We should be in no doubt - it will not. The Channel crossings will continue until such time as his Government implements a proper deterrent and starts taking on the human rights lawyers and activist judges who have done so much to limit our ability to deal with this emergency.
To be unequivocally clear, my Conservative colleagues and I firmly oppose the planned digital ID scheme. If my party believed mandatory digital ID cards were right and necessary, we would have introduced them when we were last in government. We made a clear choice not to.
Taking a longer view, the British people have always rejected ID cards – and it is notable that the Labour Party declined to be honest and open with their plans ahead of the General Election last year by putting them in their manifesto. Accordingly, there is no plausible electoral mandate for this controversial and intrusive policy now.
A single, government-issued, mandatory digital identity is simply not necessary to deliver excellent online services, check eligibility for benefits or work, or verify immigration status. It is government’s role to empower the citizen, not the other way round. That is why in government we were working on a single portal to access government services while making sure those services could always be accessible in person or on paper, too. This work was delivering tangible results - simple, easy and fast passport and driving licence applications, and right-to-work and right-to-rent checks.
In essence, mandatory digital ID would be grossly expensive and would come with considerable security risks. It would also permanently alter the balance of power between the individual and the state. I oppose this policy and will take every opportunity in Parliament
