Warrington Borough Council has backed a motion from Independent Cllr. Stuart Mann calling on the Government to guarantee that any future Digital Identity scheme remains voluntary and proportionate.
The motion, seconded by Cllr Peters, was approved at a full council meeting held at the Parr Hal, last night Monday. (20 October).
Under the agreed resolution, the Council will now ask the Leader to write to the Home Secretary and the Minister of State for Digital Government to express Warrington’s strong concern about any move towards making a Digital ID compulsory for employment.
The Council also called on Government to:
• Undertake a full Human Rights and Data Protection Impact Assessment before bringing forward any proposal.
• Guarantee that any digital or other identification system remains voluntary and that existing Right to Work checks remain valid and accessible.
• Ensure that no worker or employer is disadvantaged or penalised for choosing not to use a Digital ID.
• Share this motion with Warrington’s Members of Parliament, the Local Government Association, and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
• Affirm Warrington’s commitment to privacy, fairness, and proportionality — upholding the principle that the right to work should never depend on compulsory digital identification.
Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Stuart Mann, who represents the Burtonwood & Winwick Ward, said:“This motion isn’t about rejecting technology — it’s about ensuring that innovation always respects privacy, fairness and choice. The freedom to work should never depend on holding a government-issued digital pass.”
He continued:“Warrington has taken a balanced, responsible stance — supporting progress, but protecting residents’ rights. We’ve made clear that digital systems must remain voluntary, proportionate and accessible for everyone.”
Cllr Mann also thanked councillors from all parties for what he described as “a respectful, principled debate.”
“Whatever our political colours, this was about safeguarding basic freedoms and standing up for fairness, privacy and common sense.”
The Liberal Democrat group supported the motion.
Liberal Democrat Group Leader Cllr Mark Browne said, “We had an excellent debate with speeches for and against. My group decided to have a free vote because colleagues had different views. Most, but not all, of my councillors voted in favour of the motion. The Labour Group also allowed a free vote. It is a complex topic and no-one yet fully understands the details. This should become clearer when the public consultation starts later this year.”
Cllr Ian Marks added, “In the early 2000s Tony Blair’s Government legislated for voluntary ID cards. This was scrapped in 2011 by the Conservative / Lib Dem Coalition because it was too costly and intrusive. It is still national Lib Dem policy to oppose ID cards but we are considering ditching this.
“Sir Ed Davey says times have changed and the party should look again at the issue. He is impressed by what has been introduced in places like Estonia. A system which improved access to public services such as the provision of driving licences, childcare and welfare would be welcome, with potential for reduction in fraud. But bad, if the system introduced could be abused by an authoritarian government. At least the proposed system would not require ID cards to be carried day-to-day.
Announcing the scheme, Sir Keir Starmer said, ‘You will not be able to work in the UK if you do not have a digital ID. I do not like this compulsion. Digital exclusion for the elderly or disabled is a great concern and I am sceptical of the government claim that the system would be inclusive and work for those without a smartphone or a passport. I share the view of the Lib Dem Shadow Attorney General that the scheme would not have a meaningful impact on illegal immigration. The true cost is an unknown and rather than a saving, it could be more expensive.
Cllr Marks added: “I am less concerned about the civil liberty arguments because a vast amount of information about us all is already known to the authorities. We may not like this but it is a fact.”
