‘What we can do is build a system that works for the public good – one that saves money, boosts security, fights fraud, and unlocks economic growth.’
Patrick Hurley is the Labour MP for Southport
I used to be against the idea of a Digital ID. Like many, I worried it would open the door to a surveillance state, with government keeping tabs on every move we make. But I’ve come to realise that ship has sailed. Between social media companies, online retailers, and credit agencies, vast amounts of our personal data already circulate every second of the day. The state, meanwhile, already holds multiple fragments of our identity – passport numbers, National Insurance numbers, NHS records, driver’s licences.
Given that reality, the question is no longer whether Digital ID is a step too far. We’ve already got Digital ID, scattered amongst a range of different state agencies, private bodies and overseas tech companies. The question is whether Britain can afford not to grasp the economic and social benefits that a unified system could bring.
Let’s start with the obvious: a Digital ID would save the taxpayer money through reducing duplication. Every year, billions are spent administering and verifying the many forms of ID we already use. Departments repeat work, agencies hold overlapping records, and fraud eats into public finances. A properly designed Digital ID, used across government, would dramatically cut duplication. Fewer paper forms, fewer delays, fewer staff hours wasted on basic verification.
That’s money we could redirect into frontline services for schools, hospitals, police – the sort of thing the public actually wants us to spend their tax contributions on. The economic logic is simple: a unified system is more efficient, and efficiency is the foundation of a healthier public balance sheet.
Then there’s fraud. Right now, benefits fraud, tax evasion, and identity theft cost the economy billions each year. Criminals, especially the people smugglers causing the huge issues in border security, exploit the fact that our systems don’t always “talk” to each other. A person might claim benefits under one identity, work cash-in-hand under another, or slip through the cracks with a forged document at the border.
Digital ID can close those cracks. It makes it harder to fake, harder to duplicate, and harder to manipulate the system. For the Exchequer, that means billions saved. For honest workers and businesses, it means fairer competition. And for those on low wages, often exploited in the black economy, it means protection. A Digital ID makes it easier to prove your rights and stand up to bad employers who thrive on informality.
It’s not just about saving money – it’s about creating it. A trusted, secure system of digital identity would be an economic asset in its own right. A Digital ID done right would make it easier to open a bank account, register a business, or apply for a mortgage. For small firms in particular, that’s huge: less bureaucracy, faster turnarounds on deals and production, more time to focus on growth.
Fintech, healthcare, education, even travel – all these sectors depend on secure identity. If Britain had a world-class Digital ID system, we could become a global leader in digital services. That’s not abstract. It means jobs, investment, and new industries anchored here in the UK. It’s the sort of thing that could help turn the dial a little more on the government’s growth agenda.
In Westminster, we talk a lot about improving productivity. Well, productivity is often just about cutting out the wasted minutes and hours that add up across millions of lives. If renewing your driving licence takes two clicks instead of two weeks, that’s productivity. If small firms can hire faster because checks are automated, that’s productivity. I’ve just taken on a temporary comms officer for my constituency office, and the security checks took almost a month. That negatively impacted my office’s ability to do the work I want. A Digital ID is not some bureaucratic gimmick; it’s a platform for a more productive economy.
Of course, none of this works without trust. If people think a Digital ID is just a way for government to snoop, it will fail. That’s why the government must build this around safeguards: clear limits on use, transparency about who has accessed your data, and independent oversight. The citizen should be in control, able to see, challenge, and correct how their identity is used.
Contrary to some criticisms, handled properly, a Digital ID could enhance privacy. Right now, we spray bits of personal information around the internet every time we prove who we are. A single, secure credential would mean fewer copies of our documents floating around in insecure databases. Paradoxically, by creating one trusted system, we could reduce the exposure we all face.
This is not about ideology. It’s about pragmatism. As I mentioned earlier, I used to be against proposals around Digital ID, but the facts and the logic have made me change my mind. We can’t roll back the digital tide. Our data is already out there. What we can do is build a system that works for the public good – one that saves money, boosts security, fights fraud, and unlocks economic growth.
When I first heard talk of Digital ID, I thought it was a step too far. Now, I think it’s a step we can’t afford not to take. Britain has the chance to modernise, to streamline, to save billions, and to build the foundations of a stronger economy.
If Labour gets this right, Digital ID won’t be remembered as some bureaucratic novelty. It could be one of the quiet revolutions that help us rebuild trust in government, restore fairness to the economy, and prepare Britain for the next phase of the digital age.
Left Foot Forward doesn’t have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
