change

17/02/2026

In preparation for the 2024 general election the Labour party mantra became `change`. Something they promised to deliver after what Keir Starmer deemed to be years of Conservative corruption and cronyism. 

 “sleaze, sleaze, sleaze” - Keir Starmer, April 21st 2021.

Starmer has helped the labour party become one of change. With more than a dozen U-turns under their belt, labour can do nothing but change, and as the Prime Minister insists he will still be leader at the next general election, the British people shouldn`t have to wait too long for yet another about turn to be announced. 

It was recently reported that former director of think tank Labour Together and now sitting MP Josh Simmons had orchestrated a smear campaign against journalists to establish their “motivations”, presumably seeing them and their work as a threat to the Labour party. Mr Simmons is now being investigated by the cabinet office, whilst being in post within the cabinet office. The MP for Makerfield` s official title is: Under Secretary of State in Department for Science, Innovation and technology. However, it should be noted that he is only in post to cover the maternity leave of MP Satvir Kaur. 

A quick search on the gov.uk website  provides most of this information, including the fact that the minister's main role is implementing the rollout of the Digital identity programme. As of January 14th the Government scrapped plans to make the digital ID mandatory for the right to work. If the proposed policy has been scrapped then why have a minister dedicated to the rollout of this system?

On January 23rd Conservative MP Andrew Snowden raised the question in the commons to Mr Simmons as to “what` s plan C” for dealing with illegal migration now that the digital ID policy had been scrapped. To the astonishment of the few in the house, Mr Simmons delivered the verdict that “It hasn`t” been U-turned on and that it was in fact still “a vital part” in toughening up on the “illegal labour market enforcement regime”. Clearly the digital ID is something the current labour party, perhaps propelled by Tony Blair, is not willing to abandon altogether. 

Between February 26th and 28th 2025, Labour Together conducted a poll of 1912 adults to determine the favourability of a possible digital ID. The official results posted to the Labour Together website indicate that the 1912 people polled on this topic were told that the ID, digital or otherwise, would be "compulsory for everyone living in the UK to use”. The polling indicated that it was generally supported. However, 12% of people stated that they did not believe there were any benefits to having a digital ID, while 40% were worried that the information would be misused by the government. 

Strangely, even though Labour together conducted this poll in February 2025, it was not announced by the Prime minister as a serious policy until September 2025, after which there was a huge amount of public backlash against this policy. The vitriol nationwide was so strong that a petition against the introduction of Digital ID quickly surpassed 1 million signatures and by the time the petition closed it had reached  2,984,193 signatures. However,in February 2025, the government had already launched a Digital inclusion action plan to assess who may be excluded by the use of a digital ID and as of February 26th 2025, the Data (use and access) bill had concluded passage through the House of Lords. So by October 2nd 2025 the government had a prepared response to the petition: “We will introduce a digital ID within this Parliament to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies. We will consult on details soon.”

From this it seems that not only is Starmer` s government being heavily swayed on policy matters by Labour together, but that it is also determined to unleash a policy that is majorly flawed and completely unpopular across the UK. So, no matter what is being said publicly to regain the appeal of its voters, Labour is intent on forcing us into the use of an identification system that could cause more harm than it will ever be worth.