Digital ID was debated in Parliament, in a Westminster Hall debate opened by Robbie Moore MP on behalf of the Petitions Committee and triggered by a petition signed by nearly three million people.
The response from MPs across parties was overwhelmingly NO.
Across all parties, Conservatives, Labour backbenchers, Liberal Democrats, Greens, the SNP, Reform and Independents raised the same core concerns:
• Moves Britain toward a surveillance state
• Irreversible centralisation of personal data
• Major cyber security risk
• Serious risk of mission creep• Not in the manifesto and no democratic mandate
• Constituents do not want it
• Would become mandatory in practice
• Harms the most vulnerable and the digitally excluded
• Creates a two tier society
Reading from a constituent's message, Jeremy Corbyn, an independent MP, said:
"Digital ID is a deeply illiberal idea that threatens privacy, autonomy and the open access we should be standing for.
It risks creating a two tier Britain where access to basic services, healthcare, housing, employment, even voting, depends on whether someone has the right app, paperwork or digital trail."
Reflecting the vast cross party consensus in the debate, Corbyn endorsed an intervention from Andrew Griffith MP warning about civil liberties, the presumption of innocence and surveillance concerns, saying "he's making an important point," before going on to warn that digital ID is "being pushed by commercial interests" and urging Parliament to "say no to the government, as we have said no before."
In the debate, opposition to the proposals spanned both the political right and left.
Speaker after speaker warned that once this infrastructure exists, it will expand into work, housing, banking, benefits and public services, regardless of today's assurances.
What this debate showed very clearly is that left versus right is no longer the most meaningful divide.
The real divide is libertarian versus authoritarian.
MPs from across the political spectrum lined up on the liberty side. That matters, particularly in a country with a growing reputation for restricting free speech and quietly sleepwalking into authoritarianism.
It also raises uncomfortable questions ... If no one wants this, and Parliament agrees it is dangerous, why is it being pushed so hard?
Jeremy Corbyn was clear about the role of commercial interests, a concern reinforced by policy advocacy from groups such as the Tony Blair Institute and Visa, which has openly argued for the introduction of digital ID's.
Others also raised concerns about lobbying, infrastructure vendors, payments firms, and ID adjacent technology providers.
This petition and debate offered a rare moment of reassurance in our parliamentary system. MPs listened, understood the risks, and spoke up.
