Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Digital ID

Keir Starmer announces mandatory digital ID for Britons under pretext of tackling illegal immigration

Published

2 days ago

16 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Tim Hinchliffe

The UK Labour gov’t plans to mandate digital ID under the guise of border security, but critics warn once installed it can restrict the finances and daily freedoms of those who dissent.

Using illegal immigration as the catalyst, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is reportedly set to mandate digital ID in the U.K. while the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change claims 62 percent of Britons are in favor of digital identity schemes.

British media is awash today with the news that by Friday the U.K. government will be announcing a compulsory digital identity scheme for all adult Britons:

“A well-designed, modern digital-ID system can disrupt the drivers of illegal migration, making it harder to work or reside in the U.K. unlawfully.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

“Most recently, the debate over digital ID has been dominated by its potential to help reduce illegal migration inflows and address public concerns that the government has lost control of Britain’s borders.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

On Wednesday, the the Blair Institute published a paper called “Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works” that also uses people’s frustration about illegal immigration as a main reason to mandate digital IDs.

The report also highlights a Blair Institute-sponsored survey conducted by Yonder Consulting that claims the majority of people in the country are in favor of this scheme.

However, when looking at the Yonder survey data, it never asks those surveyed if they would be in favor of digital ID being “compulsory” or “mandatory” – those words don’t exist anywhere in the data.

“A digital ID ‘superapp’ should become the government’s flagship project – a symbol of tangible change and the Reimagined State in action.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

“Far from reflecting the ‘papers, please’ caricature of an ID card, digital ID is the foundation of a new system that brings fairness, control and convenience to people’s everyday interactions with each other and with the state.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

Participants were never asked if they were in favor of mandatory digital ID schemes, only if they supported “introducing” such systems.

“Public-opinion research commissioned by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI), published for the first time in this paper, shows that digital ID enjoys majority support among the British public, with 62 percent in favor and just 19 percent opposed.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

Here are the actual questions from the YONDER survey:

  1. Thinking about the last few years, can you say whether you have felt at all inconvenienced by any of the following?
    • Having to scan or post paper ID documents like your passport, to prove your identity
    • Being locked out of online accounts due to forgotten passwords or difficulty verifying your identity
    • Needing to provide copies of utility bills or bank statements to prove your address
    • Not having a passport or ID to hand when outside your house when needing to prove your age or identity
    • Delays or difficulty because your medical records are not automatically shared between providers
    • Confusion or delays over voter registration/eligibility, when your details have changed
    • Repeatedly having to input things like your NHS or National Insurance number, when trying to access different services
    • Long queues or delays at the U.K. border or passport eGates
    • Having to book and attend in-person appointments, to confirm details or sign documents
  2. Some are suggesting the government should introduce a new app, allowing instant access to a range of public services. For each of the following features, can you say whether you would or would not want the function to be included if such an app were introduced?
    • Reporting potholes or road maintenance issues
    • Reporting missed bin collections
    • Reporting fly tipping
    • Accessing or managing benefits
    • Reporting non-emergency crimes
    • Checking or claiming tax refunds
    • Applying for school places
    • Viewing student loan balances
    • Voting or registering to vote
    • Receiving official notifications
    • Viewing personal records
  3. Thinking about the following policy challenges facing the government … Do you think there is digital technology that could help tackle these issues but is not being fully used by the government at the moment – or do you think the government is already using digital technology to appropriate effect in these areas?
  4. Advocates of a Digital ID argue it would enable you to prove your identity, store key facts about yourself in a way that is convenient and secure, and help you more easily access a broad range of public and private digital services. For each of the following things, would you prefer them to be run by the government, or run by private sector companies?
    • A Digital ID that holds key details about you, such as your qualifications or that you have a driving license
    • A Digital ID that can personalize government services, for example through an app on your phone
  5. If a general election was held tomorrow, for which party would you vote, if you would vote at all?
  6. During a typical week, how often, if at all, do you read, watch, or listen to the news?
  7. How confident are you in your digital skills? By digital skills, we mean the ability to use digital devices (like smartphones, tablets, or laptops) and the internet safely and confidently?
  8. For each pair of statements please pick one answer that you agree with more, or haven’t you thought much about it?
    • A) The country should use digital technology as a core part of all public services
      B) The country should limit the use of digital technology in public services
    • A) Technology is generally making life better
      B) Technology is generally making life worse
    • A) I am generally optimistic about the future
      B) I am generally pessimistic about the future
    • A) The world is in a better place than it was 30 years ago
      B) The world is in a worse place than it was 30 years ago
    • A) I prefer not to adopt new technology until I have to
      B) I am always one of the first ones among friends and family to adopt new technology
    • A) The government knows too much about us as individuals
      B) The government should know more about us as individuals
    • A) Regulation tends to make things better
      B) Regulation tends to make things worse
    • A) Civil liberties such as the right to privacy or the right to protest should be protected at all costs
      B) Sometimes, there are instances where civil liberties such as the right to privacy or the right to protest need to be curbed
    • A) Immigration, on the whole, has made the country better off
      B) Immigration, on the whole, has made the country worse off
  9. How well or poorly do you think the following public services are functioning?
    • The NHS
    • Social care
    • The police
    • Schools
    • Public transport (e.g. buses and trains)
    • The Home Office (monitoring who has the right to work in the U.K.)
    • The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) (e.g. monitoring benefits/welfare payments
  10. To what extent, if at all, do you think the following bodies/organizations can be trusted to hold and use personal data safely and securely?
    • Home Office
    • My local council
    • The Police
    • The NHS
    • Department of Education
    • Banks
    • Private healthcare providers
    • Private pension providers
    • HMRC
    • Private businesses in general
  11. Part of the purpose of digital ID, according to those who propose it, is to allow government bodies and public services like the NHS, schools, and the police to be run more effectively by allowing them to make better use of data. For example, a ‘digital learner ID’ within the education system might collect data about a student’s progress to understand how they learn, which areas they need to focus on, and how they might be best supported to achieve better educational outcomes for their individual needs.
    To what extent, if at all, do you believe that collecting data in this way and storing it digitally would benefit or not benefit public services, like the education system or the health system?
  12. Having thought more about it, to what extent would you now support or oppose the U.K. introducing a digital ID system?

A digital identity doesn’t have to be required or mandated to address any of the questions in the Blair-sponsored Yonder survey.

Nevertheless, the takeaway from the 12 survey questions is that “digital ID enjoys majority support among the British public, with 62 percent in favor and just 19 percent opposed.”

“Contrary to prevailing perceptions, the survey found strong, majority public support across Britain for the introduction of a digital-ID system. After the data-sharing implications and public-policy applications of digital ID are presented, 62 percent support the idea, compared with just 19 percent who oppose it.” — Tony Blair Institute, Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works, September 2025

“This digital identity determines what products, services and information we can access – or, conversely, what is closed off to us.” — WEF, Identity in a Digital World: A new chapter in the social contract, September 2018

Illegal immigration is the Trojan Horse of choice to deliver compulsory digital ID in the U.K.

With the push for mandatory digital ID schemes being years in the making, open border policies make a lot of sense when you think in terms of the infamous strategy of problem-reaction-solution.

You have something you want to implement (the solution), so you create a problem that gets a reaction from the public, so that they beg you for the solution you wanted to implement in the first place.

Illegal immigration is just what is hot in the public’s attention right now, so that’s the excuse the current administration is going with – striking hard at the right moment after years of waiting – true to its Fabian roots.

And the agenda to rollout digital ID is indeed a long time coming: COVID, climate, CBDCs, conflict, cybersecurity, convenience – take your pick – there’s always a digital ID plot for any given reason.

Digital IDs can go from being convenient to quickly turning into tools for tyranny at any moment.

All it takes is a perceived threat, a declaration of emergency, or something as simple as a new administration in charge, and your digital ID can be used to shut you up online, shut you out of your bank account, shut you down in business, and shut you off from participating in many aspects of society if you don’t comply with whatever rules, laws, or terms of services are currently in place.

Disagreeing with medical intervention mandates, carbon footprint tracking, or the accepted narratives on climate change, foreign conflicts, or elections could all be flagged in your digital identity, thus affecting your level of access to information, goods, and services.

As yours truly first warned nearly five years ago on The Sociable, “Your digital identity can be used against you in the event of a great reset.”

When incentivization fails, coercion and force are ready to take its place.

Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
armed forces / 4 hours ago

Underfunded and undermanned, Canada’s Reserves are facing a crisis

Business / 4 hours ago

BC Ferries Deal With China Risks Canada’s Security

Censorship Industrial Complex / 14 hours ago

Total Surveillance, Censorship, And Behavior Control Are Real Goals Of Digital ID Advocates

Artificial Intelligence

China wrote the playbook on AI surveillance. Will Canada adopt the playbook?

Published on August 18, 2025

By

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy Media By Perry Kinkaide

China is an example of AI surveillance in action. Canada should take that as a warning, not a blueprint

China shows what happens when artificial intelligence is weaponized by the state.

Its Social Credit System, a nationwide framework to rate the “trustworthiness” of citizens and businesses, decides whether people can get a loan, buy a home, travel abroad or even move freely inside the country by merging financial records, online activity, travel history and facial recognition data into one algorithmic profile.

Sold as a way to curb fraud and tax evasion, it quickly became a tool to track political loyalty and personal behaviour the state doesn’t like. Step out of line, and the system punishes you.

Canadians should treat China’s misuse of AI as a warning. AI is advancing so fast that, without strict limits, we could slide into a similar dystopian future—one where governments promise efficiency and safety but use technology to tighten control over everyday life.

It wouldn’t take much for such a system to take root here. The data, the technology and the surveillance tools already exist. All that’s missing is the
decision to connect them.

Canadian governments have already shown they are willing to impose sweeping controls and restrict freedoms when faced with dissent or crisis. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Liberal government invoked the Emergencies Act—a law that grants Ottawa extraordinary temporary powers, including the ability to freeze bank accounts and bypass normal parliamentary debate—to limit movement in response to protests. Across Canada, governments closed businesses, banned gatherings, restricted travel within and outside the country, and introduced vaccine passport systems that
restricted access to certain public spaces.

Now imagine those same powers supercharged by AI—able to track, predict and act in real time, with decisions automated and enforcement instant. What used to be broad and temporary restrictions could become precise, ongoing controls that are almost impossible to resist.

A Canadian version of China’s Social Credit System could link tax filings, health records, driver’s licences, transit passes, social media accounts and other personal data. When once-separate databases are linked, previously separate pieces of information combine into a detailed profile, making it far easier to monitor, predict and restrict a person’s actions. With that much linked information, governments wouldn’t just know what you’ve done—they could control what you’re allowed to do next. That’s not a distant, sci-fi scenario.

This is why regulation matters—but Canada’s current plan falls short. The proposed Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA), part of Bill C-27, is meant to be Canada’s first law governing artificial intelligence systems that could have major impacts on people’s lives. These so-called “high-impact” systems include AI used in areas like health care, hiring, law enforcement, credit scoring and critical infrastructure—technologies where errors, bias or abuse could have serious consequences.

On paper, AIDA would regulate these systems, require risk assessments and keep humans in the loop for key decisions. But with its narrow scope, weak enforcement powers and a rollout that could take years before its rules are fully in force, it risks becoming a safety net with a hole in the middle, in effect more about managing political optics than preventing abuse.

AI surveillance is no longer a future threat—it’s already here. It combines cameras, sensors and massive databases to track people in real time, often without their knowledge or consent. It can predict behaviour, automate decisions and enforce rules instantly. Mustafa Suleyman, in The Coming Wave, warns that AI must be contained before it becomes uncontrollable. Shoshana Zuboff, in The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, reaches the same conclusion: AI is tailor-made for mass monitoring, and once embedded, these systems are almost impossible to dismantle.

Some insist that slowing AI’s development would be pointless, that other nations and corporations would race ahead. But that argument is dangerously naive. History shows that once governments and corporations gain powerful surveillance tools, they don’t give them up—they expand their reach, change their purpose and tighten their grip.

China’s example proves the point. The Social Credit System was never just about unpaid debts or tax evasion. Its real purpose has always been to track people and control their behaviour. Today, it measures political loyalty as much as financial reliability, punishing citizens for anything from joining a protest to criticizing the government online. Jobs, housing, education and even the right to travel can be revoked with a few keystrokes. Once a government is allowed to define “public good” and enforce it algorithmically, freedom becomes a privilege—granted or taken away at will.

Yes, AI-driven surveillance can catch criminals, detect threats and manage crises. But those benefits come at a cost. Once such a system is in place, it rarely returns to its original purpose. It finds new uses, and it becomes permanent.

The choice for Canadians is clear: demand enforceable laws, transparent oversight and real accountability now—before it’s too late.

Dr. Perry Kinkaide is a visionary leader and change agent. Since retiring in 2001, he has served as an advisor and director for various organizations and founded the Alberta Council of Technologies Society in 2005. Previously, he held leadership roles at KPMG Consulting and the Alberta Government. He holds a BA from Colgate University and an MSc and PhD in Brain Research from the University of Alberta.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country

Continue Reading

Digital ID

Canada’s Liberal government moves forward with plans for digital ID system

Published on July 28, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Department of Social Development hired outside consultants to provide expertise in creating a centralized, ‘single sign-in portal’ to replace about 60 different systems.

The Canadian federal government hired outside consultants who will be tasked with looking into whether or not officials should proceed with creating a digital ID system for all citizens and residents.

Canada’s Department of Social Development claimed in a May 20 note that the proposal is so complex it does not have the expertise to determine whether such a system is needed.

“Building this kind of system is complex and requires certain specialized tools and expertise we don’t have in-house,” the department noted.

“Based on international best practices, we are asking industry to help.”

The cost for hiring the consultants has not been disclosed, as per Blacklock’s Reporter. Also, there has been no parliamentary oversight to investigate the contracting.

The Social Development department said that it is moving “to next steps to our engagement of external contractors,” also noting, “This solution will give departments the ability to issue digital versions of the physical credentials they already provide today.”

The government claims that it is looking at “proceeding with procurements for issuing and verifying digital credentials” because they are “secure, digital versions of physical documents like work permits or boating licenses that can be stored in a digital wallet.”

“They offer a quicker, safer, more secure and more cost-effective way to access government services,” the government note claims.

While the department for now says that such a digital ID system would not be mandatory but “voluntary,” it noted that it is moving toward a centralized, “single sign-in portal” that would replace about 60 different systems.

Current Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has a history of supporting central bank digital currencies and in 2022 supported “choking off the money” donated to the Freedom Convoy protests against COVID mandates.

As late as February, the Liberal government under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s immigration ministry, as reported by LifeSiteNews, was secretly asking Canadians via surveys if they would accept a national identification program that would likely end up requiring each citizen to always have a type of “digital” passport on them.

While the Liberal government under Trudeau insisted the program would be optional, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre nonetheless sounded the alarm by promising to introduce a new bill that would “expressly prohibit” digital IDs in Canada.

Digital IDs and similar systems have long been pushed by globalist groups like the World Economic Forum, an organization with which Liberal Party leader Mark Carney has extensive ties, under the guise of ease of access and security.

Critics, however, have warned that the purpose of such a system is actually to centralize control over citizens. This opinion seems to be mirrored by the general public, with a Bank of Canada survey finding that Canadians are very wary of a government-backed digital currency, concluding that a “significant number” of citizens would resist the implementation of such a system.

Continue Reading

Trending

X