Keir Starmer Faces Fiery PMQs After Humiliating U-Turn On Mandatory Digital ID Cards

Keir Starmer's authority will be tested in Parliament today after the Prime Minister abandoned Labour's flagship plan to make digital ID cards mandatory for working in the UK, triggering accusations of weakness, confusion and broken promises.

Starmer will face the full force of Conservative scrutiny as Kemi Badenoch prepares to grill him over yet another embarrassing policy reversal.

Just months after declaring with absolute certainty that Britons would need digital identification to work in the UK, the government has quietly abandoned the mandatory requirement—a stunning reversal that caps an increasingly desperate year of backpedalling.

The dramatic U-turn was confirmed on Tuesday, with government officials clumsily attempting to reframe the policy by insisting that digital right-to-work checks could be satisfied through alternative forms of documentation.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander told the BBC that people could instead use 'biometric passports or eVisas'—a technical sleight of hand that essentially concedes defeat on the Prime Minister's headline pledge.

The Spectacular Fall Of Starmer's Signature Policy

Back in September, Starmer announced his digital ID scheme with the kind of absolute confidence that now makes the U-turn even more stinging. 'You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID,' he declared.

'It's as simple as that.' The policy was positioned as a cornerstone of Labour's immigration strategy—a technological solution that would supposedly prevent migrants from disappearing into the shadow economy whilst making it easier for citizens to access public services.

The scheme generated immediate controversy. Public support collapsed almost as quickly as it had been announced, plummeting from 53 per cent in June to just 31 per cent by October, according to polling data.

Backbench MPs, sensing electoral danger, refused to defend it publicly. Senior party insiders grumbled privately about the proposal's political toxicity. Ordinary voters worried about state surveillance, data security and the Orwellian implications of a mandatory identification system.

What started as a bold immigration crackdown has become a symbol of government weakness—a thirteenth major policy reversal under Starmer's leadership, according to reports. The decision reflects a broader pattern: winter fuel allowance cuts reversed, welfare reforms scrapped, inheritance tax changes for farmers abandoned, and business rates increases for pubs cancelled. Labour's record reads less like a coherent government programme and more like a list of hasty retreats.

Digital ID's Voluntary Path Signals Deeper Troubles For Starmer

The government is attempting to dress up this defeat as a minor technical adjustment. According to officials, they will launch 'a full public consultation' to determine how the scheme should actually work—a familiar delaying tactic that essentially amounts to drawing a line under the most controversial element of the policy. The revised scheme will be 'entirely voluntary' when it rolls out in 2029, meaning Britons won't face legal consequences for refusing to participate.

This represents a fundamental surrender of the original vision. The Prime Minister's entire justification rested on making digital identification mandatory for employment. Without that requirement, the policy loses most of its deterrent effect against illegal working.

An insider in the government revealed the underlying anxiety with brutal honesty, telling The Times: 'Stepping back from mandatory-use cases will deflate one of the main points of contention. We do not want to risk there being cases of some 65-year-old in a rural area being barred from working because he hasn't installed the ID.'

Conservative criticism has been withering. Kemi Badenoch is expected to use today's PMQs to eviscerate Starmer's inconsistency and flip-flopping leadership style. Earlier polling from Lord Ashcroft found that voters see the digital ID scheme as emblematic of Starmer's governing style—'expensive, intrusive and pointless all at the same time.' Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, perhaps unexpectedly, hailed the government's retreat as a 'victory for individual liberty against a ghastly, authoritarian government.'

Beyond the digital ID debacle, Badenoch is also expected to press Starmer on his government's threats to ban social media platform X and on the imminent approval of China's proposed new mega-embassy—two further examples, she will argue, of Labour's muddled decision-making and ideological incoherence.

For a Prime Minister who came to office promising to restore 'serious politics' and steady governance after years of Conservative chaos, the contrast could hardly be more damaging.