Newcastle councillors have voted down a motion calling on the local authority to oppose the Government’s plan for mandatory digital ID. The controversial policy has been announced by Keir Starmer as part of a bid to tackle illegal immigration.
The IDs will be compulsory for anyone wanting to work and will be app-based on smartphones. However, critics have raised concerns about privacy and data security, while questioning the effectiveness in controlling the borders.
At Wednesday’s meeting of the city council, Lib Dem opposition councillors called for the council to voice opposition to the plans. A motion, brought forward by Coun Mark Mitchell, said the move risked “criminalising” people without access to digital technology and risked privacy and civil liberty concerns.
Furthermore, the motion claimed there was “no clear benefits or safeguards” and called on the council to state it believed the scheme was an “expensive measure that undermined public trust”.
Speaking at the meeting, Coun Mitchell said: “We on this side of the chamber stand full scale against this measure. It was wrong in 2006 and it is wrong now.
“Law-abiding citizens have gone about their business for 73 years without compulsory ID. It is wrong to ask businesses and landlords to apply immigration laws.
“Keir Starmer wants to make people have digital ID because he and his ministers can’t get to grips with creating an immigration system that is fit for purpose. It will not work and it will drive disadvantaged people further into exploitation and fear.”
But Labour’s Coun Stephen Powers accused the Lib Dems of spreading fear.
He said: “We have very little information on what the scheme will look like and how it will be operated. I do feel that bringing this motion forward and the wording that is used is based on fearmongering, projection, hearsay and rumours.
“There’s no benefit to the people of our city to pass a motion that gives that kind of message. We should be putting out messages that are based in fact and be able to give legitimate responses to what those proposals look like.
“A motion that has the word ‘could’ about five times in it isn’t a motion that I think we should be supporting as a council. Next time are we going to bring forward motions based on internet conspiracy theories, just because things could happen?
“I urge council to reject this motion. We should discuss it when we have all the full facts available.”
The Liberal Democrats’ motion was defeated by 27 votes to 30.
