Article - Digital ID and Civil Liberty
The King’s speech to Parliament yesterday came with confirmation that the legislation introducing Digital IDs would haggardly move forward. The case for digital identification is not new, rather originating with Tony Blair’s government in the early 2000’s. Yet the context under which it has been justified has shifted. In September 2025 Digital ID was being hailed by the upper echelons of Government as a golden solution to the ever-amplifying problem of illegal immigration by enforcing mandatory digitisation of identification whenever starting a new job. Yet following a 3 million strong petition against it, Cabinet Minister Darren Jones has instead promoted the legislation as saving taxpayers billions in the long run by cutting swathes of red tape and facilitating easier interactions with public services.
Crucially, the proposed scheme would not be mandatory. This comes as an evolution of the original proposition in September which the Government backtracked on after nigh on unprecedented levels of public backlash amidst fears of creeping authoritarianism. Despite the voluntary element of the scheme, concerns have and should be raised regarding the potential long-term viability of such legislation.
Digital ID has long been touted in dystopian science fiction as a matter of fact in day-to-day life, allowing for mass surveillance and a constantly leering government, eviscerating any notions of privacy that citizens might crave for. The Government’s proposed scheme might initially only be used to propel public service efficiency, but it runs the risk of creating a framework that can be expanded upon by future governments to devastating effect. Whether it be financial information, locational data, health problems, or any other myriad of personal data, a Digital ID provides the potential framework for a nexus to be generated, synthesising diverse sets of data to construct a holistic informed profile of every individual citizen. Simply put, voluntary or not, the Digital ID scheme creates a slippery slope, and in a world where populist politics and social fragmentation is rising, such infrastructure could be used with catastrophic consequences. The Criterion Centre does not hold the specific legislative intent to be problematic therefore, but rather the ontological nature of Digital ID in its capacity to erode civil liberties at an exponential rate.
The Criterion Centre holds the firm belief that the social contract is under immense stress, and is currently nearing a point of no return. The perception that the state no longer serves its people is deeply embedded within the fabric of civil society. The Digital ID scheme being pushed for by Government in spite of overwhelming public opposition, appears to only cement this fact. One of the foremost thinkers in shaping Western conceptions of liberty was Jean - Jacques Rosseau. Rosseau noted that those entrusted with executive power are not the masters of society but rather civil servants. It is their mission to enforce and protect the laws that guarantee civil liberties. So, when the Government forces Digital ID legislation to hobble on in the face of magnitudes of public opposition, this is not only a direct violation of Rousseauian logic but also evidence that the social contract is now but mere glass, waiting to shatter.
