By now, we can accept that digital identity systems have many benefits for society and their usefulness, inclusivity and trust over some manual processes have increased adoption.
The digital ID proposal that the UK government launched last September has been met by vocal civil groups warning of the privacy inadequacies of this solution. Despite making a U-turn on its mandatory use, public opinion (53%) was in favour of having a universal digital identification system which is on the horizon. The government consultation has invited more industry responses on whether digital ID is a good idea, which could be used primarily to prove who people are with a right to be in the UK when accessing public services and for wider uses. Considering it, the NHS as a public service body has been receptive and can see a single, government-issued digital identity underpinning a faster onboarding system, improving “consistency and compliance” and enhancing fraud prevention across the whole organisation.
NHS Employers, the employers’ organisation for the NHS in England, emphasised that an approach must work at NHS scale to suit the interoperable needs and raised the concern of “inefficiency and inconsistency if every NHS employer is required to procure their own solution”.
They supported the ambition of a national digital ID which was fully inclusive so users that don’t opt for a digital route are not disadvantaged.
Identity checking could enable recruitment processes if aligned with the NHS Employment Check Standards and supporting integration with NHS recruitment and staff record systems.
Since Kier Starmer announced plans, civil organisations, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have urged the government to abandon its proposal, with a petition from December gaining 2.9 million signatures. Submitting comments to the consultation, EFF focused on serious infringements to privacy rights, security risks and state control.
















