Digital ID

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Monday 8th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I am pleased that through this Westminster Hall debate we are giving much-needed attention to the question of digital ID. Many of my constituents in South Derbyshire contacted me to share their views ahead of the debate. That includes well over 400 comments on a Facebook post in which I asked people for their views on digital ID —good, bad and perceived bad. Although there is a wide variety of opinion, many of my constituents have expressed concerns and it is my responsibility to communicate these here today.

Let me start by recognising that about a third of South Derbyshire constituents who have been in touch on digital ID were supportive, which is almost unique—people rarely contact me to tell me that they are pleased with what I am doing. There are some significant practical advantages: the ability to prove identity quickly for work; the potential to bring together passport, driving licence and national insurance details in a single secure format so that people would not need to faff around with a utility bill to prove their address anymore; and the benefits for people who currently lack traditional forms of ID. As things stand, digital ID would be mandatory only for those accessing work, although I recognise that many constituents have concerns over mission creep, which I will come back to.

[Martin Wrigley]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Samantha Niblett]

I will not, I am afraid. I want to rattle through my speech.

Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands already operate digital ID systems that make everyday tasks simpler and more efficient. For some, digital ID is a natural progression for a modern, digital economy. One constituent told me:

“We already use our phones and banking apps—this would simply streamline it”.

If done well and offered for free, digital ID could make employment checks and even voting more accessible, but it is equally important to reflect that roughly two thirds of responses from my constituents expressed serious concerns. That has unfortunately been intensified by fearmongering, some of which have heard today from certain parliamentary colleagues, but my constituents’ message was clear: we need trust, privacy and inclusion to come first—

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Samantha Niblett]

I will not give way, I am sorry. I am rattling through my speech.

Many fear that digital ID could pave the way, however unintentionally, to increased Government surveillance or the type of social credit-style monitoring that understandably alarms people. Others raise cyber-security concerns. One constituent said:

“If it can be hacked, it will be—and then what happens to our data?”

I am sure lots of tech companies would be delighted to get hold of our NHS data.

South Derbyshire is a rural constituency, and there are significant particularities when it comes to digital access and inclusion. Many older residents have raised concerns about their confidence in getting online and using smartphones. However, on this occasion, digital ID would thankfully be mandatory only for people accessing work.

There are also concerns about costs and priorities. Many people are asking why, at a time of stretched public services, the Government would invest in a new ID system that is mandatory for workers when we already have passports, licences, national insurance numbers and so on for that purpose.

[Wendy Morton]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Samantha Niblett]

I will not.

The public need to feel confident that digital ID is secure, inclusive and underpinned by strong, transparent safeguards, so I look forward to hearing more from the Government about how they intend to build trust, engage openly with the public and guarantee that no one will be left behind as this technology evolves. It must also have a brilliant user experience.

Oral Answers to Questions

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

This Government are focused on breaking down barriers to opportunity for everyone. We are backing working families, saving them £7,500 through rolling out 30 hours of Government-funded childcare and rolling out free breakfast clubs in our schools. Building on the proud legacy of Sure Start, we will deliver 100 Best Start family hubs to give every child the best start in life. We are opening 10 new construction technical excellence colleges, backing our young people to learn a trade and to get on. Our plan for change will deliver for everyone.

[Samantha Niblett]

I am sure that the Minister will have seen research last week, which parents in my constituency will be really disappointed in, saying that mums earn £302 less per week than dads. For too long, the Tories were happy for those costs to fall on women. What steps is she taking to ensure that this Labour Government tackle the motherhood penalty?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend that that is totally unacceptable. This Labour Government will deliver for women, unlike the Conservative party—whose leader said that maternity pay was “excessive”—or the Reform leader, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who claimed it was a “fact of life” that women coming back from maternity leave would earn less. We know the difference that high-quality early years education makes, which is why I am delighted that, from this week, working families will be able to access 30 hours of Government-funded childcare.

G7 and NATO Summits

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

As the hon. Gentleman will know, when we announced the 2.5% increase in defence spending, we made it very clear where that money was coming from, and it was not coming from welfare spend, as he very well knows. I do believe in the moral duty—and it is a moral duty—to defend our country, which means working with our NATO allies to ensure that we have the most effective deterrent. He cannot give lectures on the moral duty to protect our country while maintaining a position of casting aside the single most effective deterrent we have. That is unserious.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I recently visited a NATO air force base in Poland as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme I am taking part in with the RAF. There, I saw at first hand the importance of working closely with our NATO allies to defend our nation and keep us secure, as we witnessed the scramble to the skies to ward off Russian fighter jets. Will the Prime Minister confirm that he is prioritising the wellbeing of our armed forces personnel, both at home and abroad, so that they can continue to keep us and our allies safe?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. It is, of course, Armed Forces Week. Among other things, we have given the armed forces their single biggest pay increase in many years, and made a strong commitment to other aspects, including their accommodation. It is important that we recognise and reflect what they do for our country, and that we ensure we are able to retain the brilliance of our armed forces.

Oral Answers to Questions

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Wednesday 13th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Jess Phillips]

I could not agree more with the hon. Lady, as she might imagine, considering the seat that I represent. We need a strong “by and for” service in our country. We need to ensure that the geographical location of someone in the country does not matter, and that specialist services are available for black and minority ethnic women and other marginalised groups—for example, disabled victims of domestic abuse or victims of domestic abuse in the armed forces. There needs to be a specialist approach for specialist groups and we will be making sure that that is part of our violence against women and girls strategy.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

3. What steps she is taking to help end discrimination against disabled people.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to help end discrimination against disabled people.

[The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)]

Our manifesto committed us to championing the rights of, and working with, disabled people, putting their views and voices at the heart of all we do. We want a more inclusive society, removing the unnecessary barriers that have too often held disabled people back.

[Samantha Niblett]

I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the fact that almost one in five people in my constituency are classed as disabled, and after 14 years of a Conservative Government who slashed public services, there are still far too many people in South Derbyshire who report that their daily activities are significantly limited by their conditions. What more can this Government do in my constituency to support disabled people in accessing care as well as career and educational opportunities?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

My hon. Friend, in describing her constituency, speaks for the whole country. Disabled people and people with health impairments are very diverse, and we want to promote diverse, specialist initiatives to support people to stay in work, to get back into work if they have lost their job, and to progress in work, including by joining up local employment and help support. We need to remove barriers to accessing services as well.