The UK government is facing a fierce backlash over secret discussions to expand its controversial digital identity scheme to include newborn babies. This would mark a major and contentious extension of a policy originally announced to tackle illegal immigration.
Secret Meetings and 'Jaw-Dropping' Proposals
According to revelations, Cabinet Office minister Josh Simons has held private meetings with civil society groups where the prospect of issuing lifelong digital identities at birth was raised. The idea would see infants allocated a digital ID alongside the traditional 'red book' health record given to new parents.
Those present in recent Cabinet Office meetings were sworn to secrecy. One attendee reported that when the idea of extending the scheme to newborns was mentioned, "You could see jaws dropping around the room." Another warned the government appears to be "intending a lifelong mandatory ID scheme."
From 'Stopping the Boats' to Cradle-to-Grave Tracking
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer first announced the digital ID plan in September, framing it primarily as a tool for mandatory right-to-work checks to combat illegal immigration. The scheme is slated for introduction by the end of this Parliament in 2028-29.
However, the discussion around newborns suggests a far broader application. Ministers have privately pointed to Estonia, where a unique digital number is created at birth registration, as a potential blueprint. Mr Simons also suggested digital IDs could be used to verify the age of teenagers accessing social media, following models like Australia's ban on under-16s using apps like TikTok.
While the government has promoted the convenience of digital IDs for tasks like opening bank accounts, it has refused to detail the full scope of the plans or how the £1.8 billion estimated cost by the Office for Budget Responsibility will be funded.
A 'Sinister Overreach' and Constitutional Disgrace
The potential expansion has drawn scathing criticism from across the political spectrum. Shadow Cabinet Office minister Mike Wood condemned the move, stating: "Labour said their plan for mandatory digital ID was about tackling illegal immigration. But now we hear they are secretly considering forcing it on newborns. What do babies have to do with stopping the boats?" He labelled it a "deeply sinister overreach."
Former Tory Cabinet minister Sir David Davis was equally forthright, calling it "creeping state surveillance" and "an affront to centuries of British history." He accused the Prime Minister of using the "bogus premise" of immigration control to quietly expand the scheme, adding: "It's a constitutional disgrace delivered in a disgraceful manner."
Liberal Democrat Cabinet Office spokesman Lisa Smart said the reports were "a frightening development," highlighting the government's "obsession with extending state control." She argued the £1.8 billion should be spent on cutting GP waiting times and energy bills instead.
A government spokesman insisted: "The only mandatory area of the programme will be for digital right-to-work checks. Only people starting a new job will need to use the scheme." A Whitehall source added that any inclusion of children was "hypothetical" and would not be mandatory, stating "No one will be forcing them to have it."
A public consultation on the digital ID scheme is due to be launched soon, which will ultimately decide its final form. However, with protests already staged outside Parliament and the Labour party conference, the battle lines over privacy, state power, and the scope of digital identification in Britain are now firmly drawn.
