"In practical terms there is not a huge difference between proving your identity online with a passport and using a government-issued digital ID. But when possession of the latter is a legal requirement, the distinction has clear political significance. So does the government's decision this week to abandon proposals to make digital ID mandatory. People will still have to verify their identities in order to work in Britain."
"The volte-face would be less embarrassing for the prime minister if it did not conform to a pattern of equivocations and U-turns. This is not even the first such course correction of 2026. Last week the government diluted tax changes that threatened pubs with higher business rates. Last year saw multiple policy revisions and reversals. Often, as in the case of withdrawn winter fuel payments to pensioners and changes to inheritance tax thresholds for farmers,"
The government abandoned proposals to make digital ID mandatory while retaining a requirement to verify identities to work in Britain to prevent undocumented labour. Flexibility exists regarding which forms of ID can be used for verification. Digital ID is promoted as enabling streamlined access to public services, but useful adoption would be voluntary and does not require compulsion. Dropping compulsion preserves potential utility while addressing civil liberties concerns. The government has undertaken several recent policy reversals, including diluted tax changes and withdrawn benefits, creating political damage and eroding authority. Sticking with unpopular policies until forced retreat maximises the political cost of poor planning.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]