Photocreo Bednarek - stock.adobe
Government digital ID launch was a fiasco, report finds
Back-to-front policy and a rushed launch destroyed public confidence, as Home Affairs Committee is sceptical government has capacity to implement the digital ID programme
The government must undertake damage control to fix public stance on digital ID after it botched the initial announcement of the programme, according to the Home Affairs Committee.
In a report on the government’s controversial digital ID programme, the committee said prime minister Keir Starmer’s launch of the scheme had been poorly thought through and failed to make a convincing case.
“While digital ID was being discussed by Westminster think tanks and politicians, for the general public the proposal came out of the blue. The announcement and subsequent communications were completely inadequate given the impact that mandatory digital ID would have had on our society,” the report said, adding that the announcement “undermined what existing public support” there was for digital ID.
There has also been several changes to the programme since the initial launch. Starmer launched the national digital ID scheme by pitching it as a way to control undocumented immigration, through making use of a government app mandatory when employers conduct right-to-work checks. However, in January 2026, it removed any compulsory aspect of the scheme and changed the emphasis from reducing undocumented immigration to using digital ID to make access to public services the main focus.
“The fact that the government’s objectives for this programme have already shifted significantly will increase the complexity of designing and implementing a coherent and achievable project, and highlights the difficulty of defining objectives for a politically controversial programme,” the report said.
It added that the fact that so many changes have been made since the initial announcement shows how “back-to-front the development of this policy has been”.
Home Affairs Committee chair Karen Bradley said the government’s initial plans for digital ID “were nothing short of a fiasco”, adding: “Ministers have rightly gone back to the drawing board and begun the difficult task of rebuilding trust in what has the potential to be a valuable tool for government. Alongside potential benefits remains the potential for significant changes in the way people access services or interact with the state. That is why government must include voices from across society in deciding the direction of digital ID,” she said.
“This will not be a quick-fix solution. As well as learning from early mistakes in the announcement of this strategy, it must be mindful of long-term failures in government delivery of IT delivery. Each element of its future digital ID strategy must have clearly defined aims, a comprehensive plan for delivery and strong safeguards. Any future mistakes might prove fatal for public confidence.”
More clarity needed
The government does not have a strong history in delivering complex digital transformation programmes, with the same challenges reappearing. The committee said in its report that the government’s poor track record of digital transformation means it is “sceptical that digital ID will be any different”.
“The rushed nature of the government’s initial announcement of digital ID, subsequent changes of policy and the complacency about government capacity for implementation suggest that the government has not learnt the lessons from previous failures, particularly the risk of optimism bias and poorly defined objectives,” the report said.
“The fact that the government’s objectives for this programme have already shifted significantly will increase the complexity of designing and implementing a coherent and achievable project, and highlights the difficulty of defining objectives for a politically controversial programme.”
Earlier this year, the government launched an eight-week consultation on its digital ID scheme, aiming to seek views on how its digital identity system will be shaped. The consultation, which was published on 10 March, ran until 5 May, during which time it sought public opinion on how the digital ID should be designed and used, and still be accessible for those who are digitally excluded.
The consultation document suggested digital ID could help to improve public services by eliminating repetitive identification processes and reducing reliance on paper. However, the committee pointed out that the government has not yet suggested which public services may be “potential candidates for inclusion in the digital ID and on what basis”.
“The government should be clear about the evidence base for proposing future uses of digital ID and provide a clear explanation of the intended benefits. Any planned use of digital ID to combat crime should follow extensive engagement with both the public and law enforcement agencies,” the report said. “Other committees of the House will no doubt wish to scrutinise government plans to integrate public services they are responsible for scrutinising with the new digital ID.”
Privacy campaigners have been concerned that a digital ID introduced for one purpose could then be extended without consultation to other uses.
“The government is right to identify the need for safeguards to ensure that any proposed future expansions of digital ID cannot be made without proper scrutiny: not a slippery slope, rather a staircase, with progress – and direction – governed by Parliament,” the report said.
“The government should set out these safeguards in its forthcoming legislation on digital ID and ensure that any subsequent significant changes to the scheme are subject to debate in the House and the affirmative statutory instrument procedure at a minimum.”
Industry engagement
When Starmer first announced the scheme, it was met with an instant backlash from civil rights groups and privacy campaigners, but also with widespread criticism from the tech sector, where digital identity providers have been encouraged for many years to go through a rigorous compliance process to achieve accreditation on a government-approved register of digital verification services.
Startups and investors feared the impact of an official government digital ID app on their prospects for developing and growing the market in the UK. The sector contributes an estimated £2bn to the UK economy and many saw the plans for a mandatory digital ID as re-inventing the wheel, when such systems already exist.
“The government’s initial announcement threatened to undermine this sector and was in direct conflict with the government’s own policy to support a trusted digital identity sector,” the report said.
Since then, the government has improved its engagement with the sector, and it is expected the digital ID programme will have an external oversight board.
The committee welcomed the improved engagement with industry but said it “still risks missing out on the value of this expertise if it is not open to the different roles the private sector can play in helping to implement digital ID.
“We recommend that the Home Office works with digital identity providers to ensure that there is an effective mechanism for them to share the intelligence they currently gather through digital right to work checks, so that this can support enforcement activity. This work should take place immediately,” the report said.
In the King’s Speech earlier this month, it was announced that the digital ID scheme will be powered by legislation in the form of a Digital Access to Services Bill, which will form a legal framework under which the government can create, issue and use a digital ID.
Read more about government and digital ID:
- Eight-week consultation aims to get the public’s view on how the proposed digital ID system would work, and contemplates introducing a universal unique identifier linked to the ID.
- The Home Affairs Committee hearing on digital ID reveals consultation is due next week; there will be no central database; and while government wants to build the system in-house, it will not replace private digital ID providers.
- The proposed national digital identity app will no longer be compulsory for conducting right-to-work checks, removing the most contentious and widely criticised element of the scheme.
