When I first saw Tony Blair advocating digital ID and live facial recognition — again — I had that familiar sinking feeling. Not because he’s wrong about the technology changing the landscape. But because he’s almost always convinced it should be used to manage people, not empower them.
In the UK, digital ID has been a political third rail for decades. It was controversial when Blair’s own government floated it in the early 2000s. It was scrapped by the coalition in 2010. And now, it’s back — dressed in the language of efficiency, justice, and fraud prevention.
But the principles haven’t changed. Nor has the direction of travel. Once again, the conversation is framed not around rights, but around systems. Not around liberty, but around logistics.
And Blair — the consummate technocrat — is leading the charge.
It’s framed as inevitable. Logical. No big deal. Just another step in streamlining public services and “catching up” with the private sector. And if you’re uneasy about it? You’re dismissed as paranoid — a holdover from 2007, clutching your tinfoil and muttering about Tony Blair.
But digital ID isn’t just a smoother way to log into the DVLA. It’s a fundamental reconfiguration of how identity, power, and permission interact in a digitised state. And the way it’s being introduced — quietly, euphemistically, and with a heavy dose of condescension — should concern anyone who still believes in individual agency.
We’re told, often smugly, that we already gave up our privacy. We have smartphones. We let Alexa into our homes. We post our face on TikTok. So what's one more credential? Why not let the government compile it all into a single, streamlined app?
Here’s why: tech companies can’t arrest you.
They can’t freeze your bank account, deny you access to public services, or block you from travel because you shared the wrong meme. Governments can — and have. In early 2022, Canada invoked emergency powers to freeze the bank accounts of protesters and even some donors. Peaceful dissent, financial erasure. No trial required.
That’s not sci-fi. That happened.
And if anything, that’s the point. People sometimes say, “The government already jails people for Facebook posts — what difference does digital ID make?” But that’s exactly why it matters. Digital ID doesn’t create authoritarianism — it streamlines it. It turns a clunky, reactive process into an integrated, real-time system. No subpoenas, no paperwork. Just a flag, a click, and your access — to banking, transport, or communication — disappears. Efficient repression is still repression. It’s just harder to spot.
So when critics raise concerns about digital infrastructure enabling coercion, they’re not fantasists. They’re just paying attention.
And yet the pushback is painted as reactionary, irrational, even dangerous. “What are you afraid of?” we’re asked, as if caution in the face of expanding state power is some outdated neurosis.
During the pandemic, people were called hysterical for suggesting that vaccine passports might outlive the emergency. That they could normalise a “papers please” society. They were mocked as loons. But in several countries, those systems persisted long after the danger receded. Some still exist.
So yes — there’s precedent. And it matters.
The real tell, though, is how this shift is being marketed. Governments are rolling out apps like “Gov.uk Wallet,” which will eventually house everything from your driver's license to your marriage certificate — but they avoid calling it “digital ID.” They know the term still carries a scent of unease. So they rebrand it. Frame it as efficiency. A helpful little folder in your pocket.
But the implications aren’t trivial. When access to society — transport, services, even communication — is gated behind state-issued credentials, the potential for misuse isn’t theoretical. It’s architectural. It becomes part of the system’s design. If you control the ID, you control the individual.
Of course, we’re told this isn’t China. And that’s true — for now. But that’s not the point. The danger isn’t that we’ll wake up in a dystopia tomorrow. It’s that we’re building the infrastructure for one today, under the banner of modernity, and applauding as we do it.
This isn’t about nostalgia for some analogue past. It’s about safeguarding the principle that identity should not be contingent on state approval — and that the right to live, speak, move, and transact should not depend on whether you’ve ticked the right boxes in an app.
Convenience is not consent. And resignation is not reason.
Further reading
The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff
A landmark work that explains how tech companies turned personal data into a new form of economic power — and why that matters for democracy and individual freedom.
Digital ID: A Citizen's Guide by Carissa Véliz
A sharp and accessible guide to how digital identification works, who benefits, and what it risks — written by a leading philosopher of privacy.
Why Privacy Matters by Neil Richards
This book pushes back on the idea that “if you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear,” arguing instead that privacy is essential for autonomy and dignity in the digital age.
Permanent Record by Edward Snowden
Part memoir, part warning shot — the former NSA contractor recounts how modern surveillance infrastructure really works, and what happens when governments gain too much visibility over citizens.
The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age by Danielle Keats Citron
Explores how personal data — including biometric and digital ID systems — intersect with civil rights, and how the law often fails to keep up with technology.