The Labour Party’s proposal to introduce digital IDs for newborn babies has raised concerns regarding their increasing surveillance infrastructure.
The proposal remains speculative, having surfaced in confidential ministerial discussions [1] detailed by The Times, yet it draws on established practices. The UK government reportedly views [2] Estonia's system, which provides each newborn [3] with a unique identification number upon registration, as a potential model. This approach has been utilised by countries seeking to integrate large groups into new systems and to enhance overall birth registration. For instance, India registers [4] newborns babies through its Aadhaar digital identity scheme. However, this has divided opinions; critics argue that India’s latest draft of [5] the data protection and privacy law is inadequate for safeguarding the privacy and potential misuse of the Aadhaar database, which contains biometrics including photographs, facial scans, iris scans, and fingerprints of over one billion individuals.
Similarly, [6] Ghana has implemented this method with the Ghana Card, Mahamudu Bawumia [7] who was Vice President, said in 2023, “So, from next month, all babies born in Ghana, once they take them to weigh in, they will be issued the Ghana Card number and also get their Birth Certificate Identification number at the same time, because the two databases are talking to each other. This is very transformational.” So far the UK government has declined to provide specific details regarding its plans for ID cards, including the funding structure for the scheme. The Office for Budget Responsibility has estimated that [8] the initiative will incur a cost of £1.8 billion.
Secret meetings led by Josh Simons [9] a Cabinet Office minister, have addressed the concept of lifelong digital identities for infants [10] according to information obtained by the Daily Mail. Mike Wood, [11] who is a Shadow Cabinet Minister said, “Labour said their plan for mandatory digital ID was about tackling illegal immigration. But now we hear they are secretly considering forcing it on newborns. What do babies have to do with stopping the boats? This would be a deeply sinister overreach by Labour and all without any proper national debate. This policy is just another distraction from the government's total inability to deal with the crisis in the Channel. Only the Conservatives have a plan to stop illegal migration without infringing on the public's rights and freedoms.”
Lisa Smart, [12] a Cabinet Office spokesman for the Liberal Democrat also said, “Reports that ministers may be considering dragging newborn babies into their already over-reaching digital ID scheme would be a frightening development. Liberal Democrats have long warned about the government's obsession with extending state control through operation creep, and now it seems they want to go even further. Instead of forking out £1.8billion of taxpayers' cash on this authoritarian scheme, they should be focusing on getting down GP waiting times and helping to cut people's energy bills.”
In October, 2025 the UK government announced it would look at [13] whether children aged between 13 and 16 should be included in the digital ID scheme. Yvette Cooper, [14] the Foreign Secretary supported the proposal, arguing that implementing legislation for digital ID does not significantly deviate from the existing unregulated framework. “Everybody has forms of digital ID, don’t they... We all have different ways of having to prove who we are. Lots of 13 year olds already do have a form of digital ID and what the department is going to be consulting on is exactly how that should be taken forward. I do think that this is the right way forward, to have this standardised process now, and it’s something that we had been already setting out for people who come to work from abroad,” said Cooper.
However, [15] civil liberties organisation Big Brother Watch has expressed concern that digital ID is increasingly resembling a mandatory requirement for daily living. Silkie Carlo, [16] the Director of Big Brother Watch said, “The prospects of enrolling even children into this sprawling biometric ID system is sinister, unjustified and prompts the chilling question of just what Starmer's government think the digital ID will be used for in the future. At a time when parents are taking a critical view of whether children should have smart phones, it is shocking that the government is considering enrolling children into this digital ID app.We now know that digital IDs could be used for everything from tax and benefits to banking and education. It has all the hallmarks of a sprawling national database that Britain has long rejected. We urge parliamentarians to listen to the concerns of millions of people in this country and reject Starmer's mandatory digital ID.”