Digital ID: Labour MP's Reassurances Fail to Convince a Sceptical Hartlepool
- teessidetoday
- Dec 12
- 3 min read
The Labour MP for Hartlepool Promises “No Loss of Freedoms” as Digital ID Concerns Grow..
12th December 2025
Concerns over the Government’s plans for a national Digital ID system are rapidly escalating, with Hartlepool's residents said to be firmly against the proposals.
For many residents in the town, the idea of a government-backed digital identity scheme represents not modernisation, but another step towards state overreach, surveillance, and yet more erosion of personal freedoms, where this week, Hartlepool’s Labour MP Jonathan Brash took to social media to acknowledge what he described as a flood of messages from worried constituents.
Digital ID "Would be a step too far" MP claims.
In his post, Mr Brash said he had attended a parliamentary debate on Digital ID and criticised Ministers for failing to explain what the scheme would really mean in practice. He went on to state that making Digital ID compulsory would be “wrong, unacceptable, and a step too far”.
On the surface, the post appears to position Mr Brash as a defender of civil liberties. He claims to have challenged the Government directly and demanded clear answers on whether Digital ID could ever be required to access essential services such as the NHS, banking, voting, or simply “living a normal life”. He also listed a series of guarantees he says he wants from Ministers, including no centralised databases tracking people’s lives, no spending controls, no social scoring, and no loss of freedoms.
However, for many people in Hartlepool, these reassurances are unlikely to calm nerves, especially in the wake of claims the governments bid to strip Jury Trials will move forward, despite claims from many legal professionals that it will strip away 800 years worth of rights for those being accused of a crime.
Digital ID is not emerging in a vacuum. Across the UK and internationally, similar schemes have been introduced incrementally, often beginning as voluntary systems before becoming embedded into everyday life. What residents fear is not necessarily what is being promised today, but what could be imposed tomorrow once the infrastructure is in place.
In Hartlepool, opposition to Digital ID cuts across political and social lines. Many see it as incompatible with the town’s long-standing distrust of central government, particularly a Labour administration already accused locally of heavy-handedness, secrecy, and a growing appetite for control, especially in the aftermath of the Hartlepool Summer 2024 riots. Critics argue that Digital ID, as well as the rollout of Facial Recognition fits a wider pattern: expanding state power, diminishing individual autonomy, and treating citizens as data points rather than people.
MP insists the scheme "Must Remain Optional"...
Mr Brash’s insistence that Digital ID "must remain optional" may sound reasonable, but it raises an obvious question. If the scheme is genuinely benign, why is there such resistance to making it compulsory? And if it remains optional, what incentives or pressures will be applied to those who choose to opt out?
There's also scepticism about how much influence a backbench Labour MP can realistically exert over a Government that appears ideologically committed to digital governance and technological oversight. For some locals, Mr Brash’s post feels less like a firm stand, but more like damage control, aimed at containing local backlash whilst the wider policy direction remains unchanged.
One Step towards a 'Social Credit Score' Many claim !
Perhaps most troubling for critics is the broader trajectory. Digital ID is increasingly linked, in public perception at least, to concepts such as digital wallets, programmable money, access controls, and behavioural monitoring. While Ministers may deny such intentions, trust in those assurances is low, particularly in towns like Hartlepool that feel repeatedly ignored or misled by those in power.
Ultimately, Mr Brash’s post may acknowledge public concern, but does very little to resolve it. For many in Hartlepool, the fear is not simply about Digital ID as a single policy, but about what it represents: another route by which a Labour Government could slide towards authoritarianism while insisting it is acting in the public interest.
Until the Government provides full transparency, legally binding safeguards, and genuine democratic consent, Digital ID will remain a deeply divisive issue in towns such as Hartlepool—and one that no amount of carefully worded social media posts is likely to neutralise.
