Starmer’s digital ID: Here’s how it has unfolded; do not give in to “papers please” dystopia
RHODA WILSON
The following are reports relating to what has led “Sir” Keir Starmer to feel emboldened to impose digital IDs in the UK against the will of the people. People will not be surprised that Starmer is attempting to hoodwink the public using the excuse of uncontrolled illegal immigration.
It is the Hegelian dialectic: Problem-Reaction-Solution. They create a problem to generate a public reaction and then provide a pre-planned solution that achieves a desired outcome, which would have been difficult to implement without the preceding psychological conditioning. It is all according to a plan they had from the outset. What is their plan? Social control.
As The Good News Today concluded: “Beware the Hegelian dialectic. When used by the wrong hands – and minds – it can be devilishly evil.”
The following is from various sources over time. To read the full article, follow the hyperlink contained in the section title.
Enabling the use of digital identities in the UK
UK government guidance published on 13 November 2023 and last updated 1 November 2024: We’re working to help people securely prove who they are without having to present physical documents.
The government is enabling the use of trusted digital identity services in the UK. Digital identities give people another way to securely prove things about themselves, such as who they are or what their age is, without having to present physical documents. This work is led by the Office for Digital Identities and Attributes (OfDIA), which is part of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT).
The government is also rolling out GOV.UK One Login, a more straightforward and secure way for people to prove their identity and access government services online.
The Data (Use and Access) Bill includes measures to establish a statutory footing for digital verification services without creating a mandatory digital ID system or introducing ID cards.
Labour’s Big Idea Is ID Cards For ALL: Blair Wanted Them Years Ago And Now – As Macron Demands Action – Starmer Takes Interest
2 September 2025: Every person in Britain could be forced to sign up for a digital ID card after Emmanuel Macron demanded action to tackle the scourge of illegal working.
Sir Keir Starmer told the Cabinet he would be ‘exploring options’ around the concept as part of a wider package of reforms designed to make it harder for illegal migrants to live and work here.
Downing Street confirmed ministers are examining proposals for a digital ID scheme 15 years after the idea was abandoned following an outcry about the impact on civil liberties.
[The headline for this article has been altered since it was first published. It first read:]
Starmer’s Own MPs Blast Digital ID Plan As ‘Dystopian Disaster’ As PM ‘Thrashing Around’ For Solution To Small Boats Crisis
21 September 2025: On 20 September, Keir Starmer faced a fierce backlash over plans to announce compulsory digital ID cards for all British residents – something which even his own MPs have described as an “utter, dystopian disaster.”
The Prime Minister was said to have come up with the idea because he was ‘desperately thrashing around’ to find a solution to the small boats crisis.
The plans, which according to the Financial Times could be announced at Labour’s annual conference which gets underway in Liverpool next weekend, would see digital IDs being given to all people legally entitled to reside in Britain.
They would then be used for employment verification and rental agreements.
BritCard 2025: Keir Starmer Confirms Digital ID
22 September 2025: In a bold move shaking Britain’s privacy landscape, Prime Minister Keir Starmer confirmed on 4 September 2025 that the government eyes a digital ID scheme to curb illegal immigration, reigniting fierce debates over civil liberties and surveillance.
Dubbed ‘BritCard’ by advocates, this 2025 digital ID initiative promises streamlined verification for work and services but sparks fears of mandatory tracking in everyday life.
No, Digital ID Will Not Stop The Boats
22 September 2025: Labour is exploiting concerns about illegal immigration to foist yet more surveillance on law-abiding citizens.
Keir Starmer announced earlier this month that the government is considering introducing digital IDs in order to curb illegal immigration. Speaking to the BBC earlier this month, Starmer said that the introduction of a digital-ID scheme could make the UK less attractive to those entering illegally. [Is he having a laugh?]
There is simply no evidence that digital IDs would stem the flow of illegal immigration into the UK. After all, Germany, France and Spain already have ID cards, yet all three countries struggle with illegal immigration on an arguably greater scale than the UK.
Digital IDs have long been an obsession of our technocratic elites. They were pushed most zealously during the 2000s by former Labour prime minister Tony Blair, who continues to advocate for them through the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. So perhaps it’s no surprise that Starmer, Blair’s technocratic heir, is now leading the charge.
[And the Daily Mail reports: ‘Keir Starmer is condemned for ‘utter nonsense’ claim that digital ID will stop the boats’]
Checkpoint Britain: The Dangers Of Digital ID And Why Privacy Must Be Protected
A vital new report published by Big Brother Watch. It warns of the serious privacy and security risks associated with mandatory digital ID and includes independent YouGov polling.
Our groundbreaking new report, ‘Checkpoint Britain: the dangers of digital ID and why privacy must be protected’ is a timely response to the Government seeming to be on the brink of forcing every UK adult onto a giant digital ID system – all in the name of tackling illegal immigration.
Let us be clear – no one voted for a digital ID scheme and the government has no clear mandate to implement one.
The vital new report examines how mandatory digital ID would turn the UK into the kind of “papers, please” society that the British public has persistently rejected for decades. It lays out in detail how a digital ID system could work, how the government could mandate it for a range of public services, and the devastating impact it would have on privacy and civil liberties.
It also includes original independent polling we’ve commissioned showing that the clear majority of the British public (63%) does not trust the government to keep their digital ID data secure.
Download the report for free or read the key findings.
Two In Three Britons Have Safety Fears Over Keir Starmer’s Digital ID Card Scheme, Poll Reveals
21 September 2025: The public fear Keir Starmer’s digital ID card scheme will not be safe. Polling for civil liberties group Big Brother Watch found 63 per cent of Britons do not trust the Government to keep personal information secure.
It comes as the Prime Minister is expected to announce compulsory digital ID cards for all British residents at Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool next weekend.
How A Whistleblower Passed Me Devastating Proof Starmer’s Dream Of A Digital ID Card Could Allow Hackers To Extort Billions From The British Taxpayer
23 September 2025: Britain is subject to myriad dangers, from terrorist outrages to the threat of a nuclear conflict sparked by one or more of the world’s autocratic superpowers.
But little attention is given to the danger presented by a threat taking shape much closer to home: ID cards.
If the Labour Government goes ahead with its planned digital identity scheme, collecting everybody’s vital statistics under a single, computerised umbrella, Britain will be vulnerable to a hacker attack of unparalleled proportions. It will be feasible for an enemy – whether a foreign state, such as Russia or China, or an organised crime group – to hold the entire country to ransom.
Lib Dems Consider Ditching Opposition To ID Cards – BBC News
21 September 2025: The Liberal Democrats are considering ditching their longstanding opposition to ID cards amid reports Sir Keir Starmer is set to push ahead with a digital scheme.
The Lib Dems blocked Labour’s first attempt to bring in ID cards when they went into a coalition government with the Conservatives in 2010.
But leader Sir Ed Davey said “times have changed” and the party should look at the issue again and not be “knee-jerk” in its opposition.
UK National Digital Identity Announcement Anticipated Soon
22 September 2025: The UK government is about to announce the introduction of a national digital identity scheme, possibly at the annual Labour Party Conference, according to the Financial Times. But the proposal has not yet been completed, let alone revealed, leaving observers with questions and reactions informed by ideology.
The Conference runs from 28 September to 1 October, and the details of the proposal are still being finalised, sources told the publication. One proposal is for a mandatory system that would avoid paper or analogue systems overlapping with digital ones.
No2DigitalID
Stop Britain sleepwalking into a database state. Support the campaign to say no to a mandatory digital ID. Take Action now; reject plans for a mandatory BritCard (digital ID). See more HERE.
Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards
9 July 2025: We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.
We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We oppose the creation of any national ID system.
ID cards were scrapped in 2010, in our view for good reason.
Featured image: Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron (left). Ed Davey (right).
This article (Starmer’s digital ID: Here’s how it has unfolded; do not give in to “papers please” dystopia) was created and published by The Expose and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Rhoda Wilson
See Related Article Below
Hague’s support for digital ID is hardly “conservative”.
Is he stupid? Or does he just think you are?
SEAN WALSH
At least in their version of “problem, reaction, solution” the Mob managed to “prevent” the smashing of shop windows in 1930s Manhattan. The proposal to solve the immigration crisis by introducing digital ID is a far more dishonest business model than anything the embryonic New York Mafia came up with.
This was William Hague the other day:
“Arguments against digital ID are paper thin. Most voters now back them.”
[Shouldn’t that be “paperless thin, by the way? Seems even the WEF outriders slip back into old money, so to speak.]
It’s difficult to know where to start with that. Both sentences are, like families in a Jane Austen novel, unhappy in their own way. So I suppose we might as well look at them in turn, after pausing to acknowledge that these are not thoughts which would be entertained by a mind properly catechised in the traditions of conservative thought.
I don’t agree that the arguments against digital ID are paper thin (see below) but nor do I care. It’s not for me to justify my reluctance to become an algorithm. It’s for the WEF, via Mr Hague if necessary, to justify why it wishes to turn me into one. This Jesuitical sleight of hand -the reversal of the burden of proof- should fool nobody.
Conservatism used to involve an instinct for cultural preservation, an affection for the tried-and-tested, and a scepticism about snake-oil Utopianism. Is it a bit “meta” to be wistful for the good old days of “good old days” conservatism? If so, there’s another thing I don’t care about.
Is it true that “most voters” back this cultural paradigm shift? I doubt it, because “most voters” would not know what they would be voting for and, as is the way with the credentialed classes, will in any case not be included in the decision. This is the way of things, now. Your money is not your own, your children are barely your own, and your opinion is assumed to be whatever the regime experts want it to be.
But, again, for a conservative it is not relevant whether or not “most voters” would back digital ID because those voting for it are only a fraction of those affected by it. Conservatism stripped of a sense of intergenerational obligation is just snapshot, historically insensitive liberalism.
We hold our historical inheritance in trust, and are obliged to pass the best of it onto those yet to be born. Digital ID might be no more than a simple consolidation of information already available in distributed form. Or it might be an irreversible act of political, social and even religious vandalism. Who can say?
I can. It’s the second one.
Digital ID is part of a wider strategy of incremental transhumanism sold on a promise of greater convenience. It is a trap.
The transhumanist project is software driven. It is the Frankenstein creation myth refashioned in the idiom of the ascendant technologies. The integration will not be flesh and machine, but a slow-motion merger between your self and the myriad data points you generate moment-to-moment, all collected in one virtual space, for the convenience of governments and the people running them. It is identity theft by the State. You will be reduced to the algorithms on your smartphone.
Why? To keep you safe, or to keep them safe from you?
What’s at issue is not political but metaphysical. Digital ID is the replacement of a conception of the human person as soul-and-body commingled, with an abstracted view of human beings as interchangeable generators of manageable data.
As ever, we are to be sold this on the basis of “convenience”. But not all Ponzi schemes involve money. There are spiritual ones as well. We are not created to have easy lives. We are made for virtue, not comfort. The more the likes of Hague plug the “convenience” angle, the surer you can be that you are being played.
It’s pretty depressing, actually, that Hague has resorted to arguments like this, which are so insensitive to the traditions of thoughtful conservatism. He’s not doing so because he’s stupid, but because he thinks you are.
This article (Hague’s support for digital ID is hardly “conservative”.) was created and published by Sean Walsh and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply