ABC Council will write to the Prime Minister calling for the scrapping of proposals for digital ID cards, described by one councillor as a “cynical ploy to fool voters into thinking something is being done about illegal immigration”.
Ludicrous, grotesque, dangerous, ill-thought-out and an attempt to ‘out-Farage Farage’ — all words, phrases and sentiments employed as parties unanimously endorsed a DUP-sponsored notice of motion brought to the chamber on Monday night.
There was collective opposition, albeit for different reasons, across all parties during a lengthy debate.
The motion, proposed by Councillor Scott Armstrong and seconded by Alderman Gareth Wilson, sought approval to outline the council’s objections to “the proposed introduction of digital IDs by the Labour Government”.
It added that the council “recognises the significant objections to the proposals around issues such as the security of private data, government overreach, the disenfranchisement of those uncomfortable with digital platforms, and commits to writing to the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, outlining our opposition to digital identification and urging him to withdraw the proposal”.
In bringing the motion, Councillor Armstrong said he did so to “highlight the significant objections” to the announcement of digital IDs by the Labour Government in September this year.
He said the proposed scheme for those living in the UK, according to the Prime Minister, was to help combat illegal working or illegal migration — a “significant factor in driving the illegal boat crossings across the Channel” — while making it “easier for the vast majority of people” to access vital government services like driving licences, childcare and welfare.
Councillor Armstrong dismissed such assertions emphatically: “Well, Mr Prime Minister, I say what a load of rubbish!
“Can this Labour Government be even more out of touch with its people? This is not what the people voted for in the last General Election. It is pertinent to remember that the Labour Government made no mention of introducing any sort of digital ID scheme during the electoral mandate.
“This scheme is not about controlling and punishing illegal working and illegal migration. It is about controlling and punishing those of us who are here legally and working legally.
“Unless I am mistaken, we already have forms of identification that allow us to work and access government services — our National Insurance numbers, along with other government-issued photo identifications.
“Tackling illegal entry into the UK lies in our borders and enforcement, not in adding another layer of bureaucracy for our ordinary citizens. I believe this is significant government overreach — to target the few by punishing the many.
“Whilst I do acknowledge that we are moving further and further into a technological age, digital IDs are not the solution. They may very well be the problem. There are serious questions that remain over those who may not have access to digital technologies, such as our elderly population. This will lead to further disenfranchisement of those who are most vulnerable in our society.
“There are also legitimate concerns about data security. The government has not demonstrated that such sensitive information can be safely stored or that it will not be vulnerable to leaks, abuse or hacking. Only recently we have seen how online systems can be impacted by cyber-attacks on a large scale.”
The DUP representative said “significant problems” had been witnessed in the health service and airports when systems had “gone down” in recent months.
He added: “Personally, for me the most worrying aspect of this is the mandatory element of the digital IDs. The authoritarian tone of forcing people and coercing people to get digital IDs is of deep concern.”
Councillor Armstrong said the DUP had voted against Covid passports on the grounds they were discriminatory, encouraged confusion and created a shift between the individual and the State.
“Those concerns are as relevant now as they were then,” he said.
Alderman Gareth Wilson — who seconded the motion — also highlighted the impacts on the most vulnerable, the elderly and the less technologically minded.
He said that in the past year, to August 2025, there were “204 nationally significant cyber-attacks against the UK, which was a rise from 89 the previous year”.
Voicing “full objection” to the introduction of digital ID cards, Alderman Wilson said he had had many conversations with people, and all shared concerns over “how secure their data would be”.
Sinn Féin Councillor Sarah Duffy also backed the motion, highlighting her objections and those of her party against what had been described as a “Brit card”.
“I am not a British citizen. I never have been and I never will be,” she said.
“The Good Friday Agreement protects my rights to be an Irish citizen and that right must be protected in full. No matter how the British Prime Minister tries to present this, the proposal for a British digital ID is completely at odds with the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement. That Agreement was about recognising and respecting who we are — the right to be Irish, British or both — and to be accepted as such.
“For Irish citizens living here in the North to be compelled by a British Government to carry a British digital ID card is not only absurd, it is deeply disrespectful. It undermines the rights and identity of Irish citizens who have chosen to live under the protection of an international peace agreement.
“This isn’t about resisting change and technology. It’s about ensuring that no government of any stripe can dilute or disregard the identity of people in this part of our island.
“At a time when families are struggling, when health services are under pressure, when communities are crying out for investment, the focus should be on improving people’s lives, not creating confusion or division over citizenship or identity.
“While Sinn Féin agrees with the motion before us, our opposition runs deeper than that. The digital ID threatens the rights that were hard won in the Good Friday Agreement — rights that belong to every person on this island. Sinn Féin will always defend those rights and will always stand up for the right to identity, equality and respect that are central to our peace process.”
Fellow Sinn Féin Councillor Clare McConville-Walker said the digital ID scheme “threatens to erode trust in government” and undermines rights under the Good Friday Agreement.
“This isn’t just a privacy issue,” she said. “It’s also about the North’s unique post-Brexit reality, bound to both UK and EU markets under the Windsor Framework. A Westminster-imposed ID risks disrupting cross-border trade, complicating workers’ lives and deepening divisions, all whilst sidelining the Irish identity protected by the Agreement.
“With recent polls showing growing support for a border poll, this top-down scheme exposes London’s disconnect from our needs and ultimately strengthens the case for a United Ireland. We believe the British Prime Minister’s proposal for a mandatory British ID is ludicrous and ill-thought-out.
“So let’s send a clear message from this chamber: our communities here deserve solutions that unite, not divide.”
There was equal consternation to the Prime Minister’s proposals from Councillor Thomas O’Hanlon, who said that citizens already had National Insurance numbers and passports and did not need “new techie costly gimmicks”.
And the SDLP representative insisted: “Digital ID cards won’t stop the boats. They’ll not stop illegal or indeed legal immigration. They’ll just stop common sense.
“This whole Labour Government are really worried about those working in the black economy. Why don’t they invest in clamping down on the mistreatment and exploitation of low-paid workers, many of whom happen to be immigrants?”
Councillor O’Hanlon said to brand the digital ID as “some sort of Brit card” was “tone-deaf and grotesque”.
He added: “It fails to recognise the complexities of this place — of Northern Ireland — and its people. It ignores the liberality of dual identities, cross-border lives and the delicate balance that we fought to preserve. It fails to recognise those of us who are Irish, who carry an Irish passport and no other.
“This isn’t immigration policy. It’s theatre. It isn’t about policy. It’s about politics. The digital ID card scheme is a desperate attempt to out-Nigel Farage Nigel Farage. It won’t stop the boats. It won’t fix an asylum system that is broken and it certainly won’t make borders any safer. It’s propaganda dressed as policy.”
Deputy Lord Mayor Jessica Johnston highlighted the Alliance Party’s objection to the proposals, referencing the “blatant issue of practicality and day-to-day living here in Northern Ireland”.
She said people here travelled north and south to work every day and “none of the everyday realities appear to have been thought through”.
And Councillor Johnston added: “People have a right to go about their daily lives without infringement, and no-one should be criminalised just because they don’t want to hand over their private data.”
TUV Councillor Keith Ratcliffe said digital ID cards were not the means or method to address illegal immigration.
He said: “If the government are truly committed to stopping illegal crossings, direct measures are required to stop boats in the Channel before people reach UK shores. Quitting the European Convention on Human Rights would be the first logical step, freezing non-essential immigration would be the second, and immediately deporting those who are arriving illegally rather than accommodating them in hotels would be the third.”
Councillor Ratcliffe also said he shared “genuine concerns” about the proposed centralisation of personal data, adding: “Collecting and storing all citizens’ personal information in one digital system carries clear risks — risks of misuse by the government and data breaches by hackers.”
The Cusher representative insisted the introduction of digital IDs would have “ramifications for the civil liberties that we all enjoy and must be resisted”.
“The TUV is clear,” added Councillor Ratcliffe. “This is a cynical ploy to fool voters into thinking something is being done about illegal immigration, when the reality is there are genuine fears that this will infringe further on the freedoms of UK citizens.
“That said, the digital ID debate raises another equally serious question regarding the constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom. Digital ID is a national matter. There can be no Irish Sea ID border. I’m glad that my party elders will oppose the scheme’s introduction at Westminster. But there must be no question of yielding to Sinn Féin’s anti-British agenda by exempting Northern Ireland from a UK-wide system. Doing so would create a dangerous two-tier approach to citizenship — one for Great Britain and another for Northern Ireland.
“I caution unionist colleagues in this house tonight: our legitimate concerns over ID cards must not be exploited to drive a wedge between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. We must not allow constitutional integrity to be undermined for political convenience.”
The DUP’s Kyle Moutray said the very core of the debate was about trust.
“Trust in a government that wants to collect and store more of our personal data than ever before throughout the course of history,” he said. “Yet week after week that trust continues to fade.
“We have already seen the Labour Government cast aside pensioners. We’ve seen them betray our farming community. We’ve seen them pile insurmountable pressures on small businesses that just want to make a living, just want to get by. And now they want us to hand over our most private information to be stored in yet another government database.”
Councillor Moutray continued: “Only last week, a few days ago, we saw a prolific sex-offending illegal migrant released from prison by mistake. That’s a catastrophic error — someone who sexually assaulted a 14-year-old girl! If this government cannot competently manage something as serious as that, then how on earth are we expected to trust them with the digital identities of millions of law-abiding citizens?
“Keir Starmer’s rationale for digital IDs is that it will control illegal immigration by making it harder for those without legal status to find employment in the United Kingdom. He is not looking at stronger border enforcement. He is not looking at efficient deportations, as we are seeing in many other Western nations. He is not looking at stopping the boats that come in on a weekly basis. No. Instead, we are told that everyone must sign up to digital ID. That’s his grand solution. That’s his great plan.
“In truth, it’s nothing more than gaslighting from the Prime Minister — and we can all see it.”
DUP Councillor Scott Armstrong thanked all in the chamber for their unanimous support but questioned the reasons.
“This motion wasn’t about the constitutional status of citizens within Northern Ireland. It wasn’t about what you identify as — Northern Irish, British, Irish, or whatever you want to identify yourself as,” he said. “This is a bigger story than that. This is about government overreach and government control over what information they possess on you, and what you can do with that information.”
Mr Armstrong said ID cards would not stop illegal immigration, before posing a final question to “the parties that have mentioned that they are against this on the basis of a Brit card or Good Friday Agreement or their status as a citizen”.
He asked: “If this was implemented by the EU, or if it was implemented by the Irish Government, how many of you would sign up to it? Because I can guarantee you today that you would sign up to it in the morning if your EU overlords told you you had to do it.
“Look deeper into yourselves, into what this is actually about. This is not about your constitutional status or what you identify as. It’s about government overreach, government failures, and how we as a society should not be letting government dictate our personal data and what they do with it.”
