Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has announced that all UK citizens and legal residents are to have a mandatory digital ID to prove their right to live and work in the country.
Author
- Alex Hardy
Postdoctoral research associate, University of Liverpool
Starmer and Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey have cited Estonia as an example of where digital IDs have proven successful. Davey noted that "times have changed" since the unsuccessful ID card plan under the Blair government.
He also enthused about the liberal Estonian government that had delivered digital IDs while maintaining liberal values. He has now chosen to row back on that position due to pressure from within his party.
The government has, driven by political necessity, led with claims about how the digital ID can minimise illegal working and misuse of public services as it seeks to build a consensus with the public for its plans.
Nevertheless, it needs to navigate concerns from both the political left and right . The Estonian case remains perhaps the leading example of digital ID in Europe, and is a particularly mature case, with more than two decades of success to highlight.
I have a long track record researching the politics of digitalisation, and spent several years living in Estonia. Drawing from that experience, there are various opportunities and pitfalls the UK government needs to be aware of.
Opportunities include enhanced public service delivery through efficiency. No more arduous need to prove who you are with paper bills, driving licences and different authentication processes for each service. In Estonia, a technology system, dubbed "X-Road" , allows all relevant organisations to securely interact with digital ID holders.
The UK could potentially emulate this model. It can minimise the grey economy (economic activities that are not taxed or monitored by the government). It can also prevent illegal work and tax avoidance, prevent false benefit claims and speed up interactions with the state.
Digital society
Estonia saves around 2% GDP annually thanks to the use of digital signatures to cut bureaucracy. "E-Estonia" (the Estonian term for their "digital society") is closely associated with stimulating economic growth by empowering business creation.
Estonia has the highest per capita number of start-up unicorns - tech companies now valued at over US$1 billion (£743 million). Given the UK government's focus on AI and the tech industry as a way to "turbocharge" the economy, there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the potential for digital IDs in Britain.
Amid widespread scepticism from the left and right, trust can be built through positive experience. If a service works, evidence from Estonia has suggested that it enhances public trust and can be expanded further.
A popular critique is that digital ID represents a security and privacy risk. Of course, any data can be potentially hacked or leaked. However, security and privacy is built into the system in the form of a decentralised data exchange, the X-Road, that provides timestamps and records of access.
This ensures only appropriate people have access to digital ID data and is designed to reassure the user. In Estonia, people can identify themselves in various ways, for example using a physical ID card inserted into a card reader or SmartID - another system for authenticating users online - using a mobile device.
There's also plenty of evidence that shows this system works well. It can also be complimented by positive experiences once the system is actually working. General research on technological acceptance shows that users judge any given innovation on its perceived usefulness and attitudes toward it.
In Estonia, the public quickly adapted to services that made a demonstrable positive impact. However, Estonia proved that it could work with and adapt the technology at pace.
The UK government has promised to roll out the scheme by the "end of parliament", which contrasts with Estonia passing a bill in the Riigikogu - Estonia's unicameral parliament - in 2000, having a working pilot in 2001 and progressing to national deployment on December 17 2001. Ensuring that development does not run over time and budget could enhance trust, perhaps by adapting existing technology.
Transparency vital
Beyond usefulness, transparency is vital. Transparency in how the digital ID will work, who will be able to access data and accountability for misuse must be carefully considered, communicated and rules rigorously enforced.
Estonia has established strong legislation to this effect and punished those who have broken these laws. It has also been transparent in events of failure. Ultimately, the devil will be in the detail and the success of Britain's digital ID may be determined as much by politics as by the technology.
Nevertheless, key questions remain around authentication processes (to ensure people are who they say they are) and systems. Who will develop, implement and maintain the project? Crucially, how much will it cost and when will it be ready? The British state has a poor recent record of project delivery generally, including in the realm of major digital investment.
Public spending has frequently run over schedule and over budget. The NHS track and trace app, for example, was extremely costly, not widely used and marred by claims that it did not actually help prevent the spread of Covid-19.
Estonia is far from the only nation using digital ID , and much criticism in the UK relates to ID in general. Many functioning democracies across Europe and beyond mandate ID in some form, often digitally. This will increase with the EU's eIDAs (electronic identification, authentication and trust services) 2.0 regulation - which is designed to ensure secure cross-border monetary transactions, with a focus on electronic identification.
Yet in Estonia, users are not mandated to use it by law. In Estonia, you can throw your card in a drawer and not bother with any aspect of the digital state, if you like. Nor do you need to produce it on command.
The lesson from the Baltic nation is that a functional digital ID will not necessarily turn Britain into a police state. But if implemented quickly, efficiently and transparently, it could modernise the British state.
Alex Hardy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
