{"id":315841,"date":"2025-09-26T07:00:50","date_gmt":"2025-09-26T07:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=315841"},"modified":"2025-09-28T07:16:17","modified_gmt":"2025-09-28T07:16:17","slug":"keir-starmer-expected-to-announce-plans-for-digital-id-cards","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=315841","title":{"rendered":"Keir Starmer expected to announce plans for digital ID cards"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction \u2013 Sept 25, 2025<\/strong><\/h1>\n

Starmer’s proposal for a national ID card system is not what it seems.<\/p>\n

Opposition to a UK National Identity has fluctuated over the years, with the cost being a decisive factor. For example, a 2005 BBC survey<\/a> found 17% were in favour and 83% were against ID cards.<\/p>\n

While a 2005 DailyTelegraph\/YouGov poll found that 66 percent were opposed to a National ID card<\/a> if it cost \u00a36 billion with that figure rising to 81 percent opposed if the cost was \u00a310-19 billion.<\/p>\n

Clearly, even twenty years ago there was solid opposition to such a scheme.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why Starmer\u2019s announcement looks like a classic problem\/reaction\/solution routine.<\/p>\n

For the uninitiated, that\u2019s when a problem is created, or allowed to happen, which the public demands a solution for. However, the proposed remedy is in the form of measures or legislation that the public had previously deemed unacceptable.<\/p>\n

However, so urgent is the need for a solution that voters are ready put aside their previous opposition in order to solve the problem.<\/p>\n

Is that what has happened here?<\/p>\n

As the Guardian reports below:<\/p>\n

\u201cthe national mood has moved on since Tony Blair\u2019s plans for ID cards were abandoned in the 2000s\u201d<\/p>\n

The national mood has indeed changed with the migrant crisis. Was it \u2018allowed\u2019 to happen? Under Starmer and his predecessors the government almost encouraged illegal immigration: letting illegal migrants into the country without scrutiny, putting them up in four-star hotels<\/a> and providing them with financial support<\/a>, often without question or serious scrutiny.<\/p>\n

To anyone coming from a poverty-racked country it must have seemed like an irresistible opportunity. So it\u2019s no wonder that so many illegal migrants flocked to Britain.<\/p>\n

That was the plan.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Previous governments and this one have actively created this problem and now that voters are demanding that something be done the government has stepped forward with a solution.<\/p>\n

Or so Starmer and the mainstream media would have us believe.<\/p>\n

Only it\u2019s not meant to solve the problem of uncontrolled immigration. It\u2019s meant to pave the way for greater and more extensive powers of surveillance, which will start with a compulsory national identity card.<\/p>\n

This can then be linked to a national database with health and employment records, and whatever else the government wants to keep tabs on.<\/p>\n

This is a recipe for totalitarianism and like all totalitarian regimes it\u2019s founded on lies.<\/p>\n

One might even say that Keir Starmer’s plan is based on diabolical logic. Literally.<\/p>\n

In the light of Starmer\u2019s announcement I’m going to make a prediction.<\/p>\n

I’m not a psychic but more people are waking up to the lies foisted on them by the government and its subservient media. As a result I suggest that Starmer’s proposed ID scheme is going to face mounting opposition and as it does so more people are going to start waking up.<\/p>\n

Peaceful or violent, tumultuous change may be on the horizon. Ed.<\/p>\n

Keir Starmer expected to announce plans for digital ID cards<\/strong><\/h1>\n

Rowena Mason and Robert Booth \u2013 The Guardian Sept 25, 2025<\/strong><\/h2>\n

All working adults will need digital ID cards under plans to be announced by Keir Starmer<\/a> in a move that will spark a battle with civil liberties campaigners.<\/p>\n

The prime minister will set out the plans on Friday at a conference on how progressive politicians can tackle the problems facing the UK, including addressing voter concerns around immigration.<\/p>\n

The proposals for a \u201cBrit card\u201d would require legislation and are already facing opposition from privacy campaigners.<\/p>\n

However, No 10 is understood to believe that it is necessary to make sure people have the right to work in the UK to tackle illegal migration, and that the national mood has moved on since Tony Blair\u2019s plans for ID cards were abandoned in the 2000s.<\/p>\n

Shabana Mahmood, the new home secretary, is a backer of the plans, having said her \u201clong-term personal political view has always been in favour of ID cards\u201d.<\/p>\n

Starmer said this month that digital IDs could \u201cplay an important part\u201d in making Britain less attractive to illegal migrants and France has repeatedly claimed that the lack of official cards acts as a \u201cpull factor\u201d.<\/p>\n

Ahead of his speech on Friday, Starmer spoke about the government\u2019s goal of \u201cpatriotic renewal\u201d, comparing it to \u201cthe politics of grievance, of toxic divide, which is what Reform are all about\u201d. He dismissed the Conservative party as \u201cbasically dead\u201d.<\/p>\n

The Guardian revealed in June<\/a> that Downing Street was exploring proposals for a digital ID card to crack down on illegal migration, rogue landlords and exploitative work.<\/p>\n

The idea came from a Labour<\/a> Together paper given to the No 10 policy unit proposing a Brit Card, which it claimed could help avoid another Windrush scandal.<\/p>\n

The thinktank paper also said it would help reduce vast numbers of visa overstayers, saying half of those whose asylum claims were turned down over the past 14 years were probably still in the UK. It proposed a free, secure digital ID, stored on a person\u2019s smartphone using ministers\u2019 planned gov.uk Wallet app, rebranded as the Brit Card app. That could then be verified by employers, immigration, banks and landlords using a free verifier app.<\/p>\n

Under the likely plans, the technology is expected to be built on the government\u2019s existing \u201cOne Login\u201d infrastructure, which already allows citizens to access about 50 government services, from applying for a job as a teacher to using a lasting power of attorney.<\/p>\n

The report\u2019s author and the thinktank\u2019s director of technology, Kirsty Innes, is now a special adviser to Liz Kendall, the technology secretary. When the paper was published, she said: \u201cA progressive society can only work if we have meaningful borders. BritCard would make it far harder to flout the illegal work and illegal rent rules, and far easier to identify and punish exploitative illegal employers and landlords.\u201d<\/p>\n

The plans were welcomed by the Tony Blair Institute, with its director of government innovation, <\/strong>Alexander Iosad, saying: \u201cMake no mistake, if the government announces a universal digital ID to help improve our public services, it would be one of the most important steps taken by this or any government to make British citizens\u2019 everyday lives easier and build trust.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, they were opposed by David Davis, the Conservative MP and former cabinet minister, who led the charge against Blair\u2019s ID cards decades ago.<\/p>\n

Davis said: \u201cNo system is immune to failure, and we have seen time and again governments and tech giants fail to protect people\u2019s personal data. If world-leading companies cannot protect our data, I have little faith that Whitehall would be able to do better.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Liberal Democrats said they could not support \u201ca mandatory digital ID where people are forced to turn over their private data just to go about their daily lives\u201d.<\/p>\n

The Conservatives did not give a position, but its leader, Kemi Badenoch, said: \u201cThere are arguments for and against digital ID, but mandating its use would be a very serious step that requires a proper national debate.<\/p>\n

\u201cInstead, this is a throwaway conference announcement designed to distract attention from Andy Burnham\u2019s leadership manoeuverings and the crisis in Downing Street over the prime minister\u2019s chief of staff.\u201d<\/p>\n

Jim Killock, the executive director of Open Rights Group, highlighted that the digital ID card scheme was not in Labour\u2019s manifesto, arguing that it was \u201cthe last thing this government should be embarking on during a cost of living crisis\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe digital visa schemes that are already in place for migrants are a stark warning of the harms aused by data errors, systems failures and an indifferent, hostile Home Office. People have been unable to travel, lost job offers and even been made homeless because of existing digital ID schemes,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cLabour are at risk of creating a digital surveillance infrastructure that will change everyone\u2019s daily lives and establish a pre-crime state where we constantly have to prove who we are as we go about our daily lives.\u201d<\/p>\n

David Rennie, a former official at the Home Office\u2019s identity cards programme and now chief trust officer at the startup Orchestrating Identity, said it was \u201cabsurd\u201d to suggest a digital identity would stop illegal migration.<\/p>\n

\u201cProposing a headline-grabbing \u2018government digital identity for all\u2019 as a way of combating illegal migration shows a lack of understanding or learning from the last 20 years,\u201d he said. \u201cEmployers already have to prove a prospective employee\u2019s right-to-work in the UK or receive a \u00a345k fine.\u201d<\/p>\n

Source\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Is this why immigration went out of control under Starmer? Did they lose control so that voters demanded the problem be fixed? Previous attempts to introduce ID cards had failed but that might change due to growing concern over illegal immigration. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":110,"featured_media":315853,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[59],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-315841","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-Surveillance"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315841","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/110"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=315841"}],"version-history":[{"count":18,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315841\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":315884,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315841\/revisions\/315884"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/315853"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=315841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=315841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=315841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}