The impact of Digital IDs, and why their success relies on Data Management
ID cards are back on the table, nearly two decades years after they were first planned by Tony Blair’s government, and abandoned by Gordon Brown’s. The current proposals from the Kier Starmer government would introduce ID cards digitally, and in the Prime Minister’s words, ‘You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It's as simple as that.’ To call the policy controversial would be a serious understatement, with similar civil liberties’ opposition raised as were in the mid 2000s. However, supporters see immense potential for national security and service streamlining. If digital ID cards do arrive, what will be the key to success in preparation for their introduction, and during their use?
Opportunities and challenges with digital ID cards
Digital ID cards are not without precedent. For example:
- Estonia has had a compulsory digital ID card since 2002. As the proposed UK ID cards would be, it is currently a smartphone-based identity verification method.
- Denmark offers an ID app as login options for services (public and private). It is not obligatory, but ‘life online is almost impossible without’ it.
- Singapore has a digital ‘SingPass’, which is not mandatory, although registration for the physical ‘National Registration Identity Card’ is.
In the countries which have them, Digital IDs are part of the normal fabric and function of daily life. Having a single consolidated form of identification streamlines processes like loans, job applications, and paying taxes. The UK government claims that India’s ‘Aadhaar’ digital identity number ‘saved around US $10 billion annually by reducing fraud and leakages in welfare schemes’. The attraction is clear for the public sector and for organisations who handle and process large numbers of citizens and customers. The administrative burden on verifying rights and identity can be quite onerous, and having a single point of verification could be an efficiency blessing.
However, there is also precedent for digital ID card problems. One of those risks is security. In 2021, an Estonian hacker found a vulnerability in the state portal and was able to obtain 300,000 document photographs. Wider government organisations, and private institutions like banks, would process and hold vast quantities of digital ID information, and will be tempting targets. Robust Data Governance is fundamental to the security of digital ID. Organisations must know clearly, and in detail, what data they have, where it is held, who has access to it, and who is responsible for it. Without that, adequate security is impossible.
The size of the digital ID project is also a challenge in itself. The volume of data required across departments, businesses, and agencies constantly risks duplication, gaps, and ambiguity. Those risk the very function of digital ID as a reliable institution. Master Data Management (MDM) for citizens and for customers protects a clear, accurate and up-to-date view of every individual. MDM is an organisation-wide set of processes and structures that prevent data silos and duplication. In the case of ID cards, it would prevent inconvenient, alienating, or legally risky scenarios in which people’s IDs could be unrecognised, missing, or inaccurate.
Public trust and ID cards
There is serious opposition to digital ID cards, as there was to the ID cards proposed in 2006. Critics see ID cards as an instrument of state overreach. Some see it as the foundation of a regime like China’s social credit score system, which can limit citizens’ rights to accommodation, internet access, and domestic and international travel. Civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch raised multiple concerns with ID cards, arguing that ‘This system would fundamentally change the nature of our relationship with the state and turn the UK into a “papers, please” society’, and that ‘A centralised digital ID scheme would also be a honeypot for hackers and foreign adversaries, creating huge digital security risks for our data.’
Civil rights advocacy group Liberty believes that ‘Technological advancements mean that digital ID systems pose an even greater risk to privacy than they did when last proposed in the 2000s. A single and unique ‘digital identity’ and centralising databases would remove much of the individual’s agency in managing their data.’ A swathe of public opinion and pressure groups are sceptical of (or utterly opposed to) digital ID cards, meaning that if introduced, they will be a subject of suspicion and resentment for many.
That objection is a philosophical and political one, and those who think ID cards are inherently problematic won’t be won over by a slick data apparatus. However, some will be on the fence or somewhat unsure or cautious. Any teething problems, security breaches, or errors that make life harder, compromise safety, or create real or perceived injustice will delegitimise ID cards and undermine wider public acceptance. For some, a smoothly-functioning ID card system that makes daily life easier will be enough.
Data gaps, ambiguity, and errors will compromise the integrity of the ID card system by causing stressful and costly mistakes that delay people’s daily business, interrupt their services, and even threaten their lifestyle. Proper Data Governance and MDM will allow the transparency that the public will expect, and the effective operation that they will demand.
Whether you’re implementing a Data Governance or MDM framework or on the very first step of your data journey, Agile can help you at every stage — from establishing your organisation’s Data Strategy, to the selection of the right tools. Call 01908 010618 or contact us here.