Pros and cons of ID cards in the UK

Labour could revive its Blair-era policy of ID cards for all UK citizens in a bid to track how many people there are in the country and reduce illegal immigration.

Shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock told Times Radio an identity scheme was being looked at “very, very carefully indeed”, arguing it would be “so helpful” in reassuring the public that “we have control of our borders”.

The idea was quickly shot down by shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, however, demonstrating how much of a politically toxic and difficult issue ID cards still are in the UK, despite being commonplace across Europe.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Here are some of the pros and cons of an ID card system:

1. Pro: keeps track of numbers

It is remarkable that, in the digital age, UK officials can still not accurately track the number of people entering and leaving the country.

Highlighting this issue when setting out the case for ID cards, Kinnock said: “I thought it was extraordinary in the wake of Brexit that everybody said, ‘Oh, there are three million EU citizens in the UK’, and it turned out there were five million. It is just simply extraordinary that we had two million more people in our country than we thought we did. That is just not sustainable.”

While a good universal ID system “can make the delivery of and access to public services more efficient” argued GMA News in 2018, it could also prevent immigration crises like the Windrush scandal.

2. Con: encroach on rights

Libertarians and civil rights groups have long campaigned against the idea of mandatory ID cards, arguing they infringe on individual liberties.

Boris Johnson, a vocal opponent of the scheme, wrote in The Telegraph in 2004: “There is the loss of liberty, and the creepy reality that the state will use these cards – doubtless with the best possible intentions – to store all manner of detail about us, our habits, what benefits we may claim, and so on”.

Speaking this week, former Tory policing minister Kit Malthouse told Times Radio “it’s not far to jump from that to us all having a barcode tattooed on us at birth”.

“It is 20 years since New Labour consulted on a proposal for mandatory ID cards under David Blunkett, the then home secretary. The plans proved controversial then, and they will no doubt be controversial now,” said Labour List.

However, “supporters of ID cards argue that two decades on, the data people readily share with social media sites and private companies has tilted the balance on privacy arguments,” said The Times.

In a bid to address these civil liberty concerns, Kinnock suggested everyone would apply for registration, while the data stored would be limited to address civil liberties concerns to a “very simple and basic” form of ID.

3. Pro: can end trafficking

A report published in July by the Tony Blair Institute recommended introducing universal mandatory digital identity cards to help to alleviate the Channel migrant crisis, which has seen almost 40,000 migrants illegally reach the UK in small boats this year.

Many of these are the victims of criminal gangs making thousands of pounds on each journey.

In a 2018 report supporting universal ID cards, the centre-right think tank Policy Exchange said that illegal immigration “fosters a twilight world of criminality, dependence and exploitation in which modern slavery flourishes”.

“Combating [illegal immigration]…should be overtly linked to the enforcement of the minimum wage, private landlord licensing and action against modern slavery”, it concluded.

4. Con: don’t tackle illegal migration

The Daily Telegraph suggested there is “little evidence” that ID cards would help combat illegal immigration.

“Many people who are described as illegal immigrants are, in fact, asylum-seekers,” the paper said. “An ID scheme would not prevent their arrival in the country” as “existing restraints – such as National Insurance checks and minimum wage requirements – are already flouted.”

5. Pro: regulate access to employment

“One reason that migrants and refugees are so keen to get to the UK is that it is easier then to get a job and housing because we do not require identity cards” said former Tory minister David Willetts in Conservative Home.

Under the Tony Blair Institute’s plans, all individuals would be required to produce their digital identity card, showing their legal right to reside, to access employment or benefits. The report said that this would make it harder for undocumented migrants to “disappear” into the informal economy.

The Times said the proposals “are likely to be welcomed by the French government, which has repeatedly blamed Britain’s informal labour market for attracting so many illegal migrants to cross the Channel”.

“I do not like the idea of ID cards any more than I like higher taxes, but they are a very effective way of policing access to jobs and public services” said Willetts, adding that “a Britain with ID cards would be much less attractive to migrants.”

6. Con: they could single out minorities

There is already concern that new laws requiring voters to present ID at polling stations could disproportionately disenfranchise minorities and marginalised groups.

Research shows that more disadvantaged groups are less likely to have ID, and the Electoral Reform Society has said “those with severely limiting disabilities, the unemployed, people without qualifications, and those who had never voted before were all less likely to hold any form of photo ID”.

Far from helping minorities, Conrad Landin wrote in The Guardian in 2018 that “ID cards would drive an even bigger wedge between so-called mainstream society and its margins”.

“As with stop-and-search powers and tenancy checks, black and Asian people would be challenged most often to prove their identity.”