The vote settled on Yes by three to one, but the argument was less a ringing endorsement of fingerprints than a demand that impersonation become harder. The room heard a safety case, a distrust-of-government case and, beneath both, an uneasy bargain between secure testing and a larger identity system.
The strongest Yes voices argued that photo checks had plainly failed to close the gap. One voter backed “some means of validation that cannot be tampered with”, while the highest-rated Yes intervention widened the claim to “migrant doctors” and “the tip of the iceberg”; other supporters were more restrained, saying they would use biometrics as readily as banking on a phone.
No voters did not deny that cheating was undesirable. Their objection was that the proposed remedy solved an administrative failure with a new infrastructure: the floor’s best-rated No voice said simply, “Nope. Do a better job”, while another insisted, “I.D. is already required”; others called it “another attempt to build digital ID”. The sides largely talked past each other, with Yes arguing from the consequences of a fraudulent pass and No from the risks of normalising biometric storage.
That makes this a small but recognisable chapter in the wider argument over digital ID, privacy and trust in state systems. Even among Yes voters, the caveat was explicit: “who has access to the data base & what else it is used for”, while No voters feared that function creep would follow almost by design.
The chamber endorsed stronger proof of identity, not a blank cheque for the machinery behind it.
30 Opinions
It’s not just driving tests that are being abused by migrant fraudsters. Our high trust society is open to endless abuse from foreigners merely wanting financial rewards. Migrant doctors buy their medical qualifications and pay people to sit proficiency tests on arrival. This just the tip of the iceberg that’s eating away at Britain. Ever wondered why productivity and standard are dropping? We’re a soft touch, far too naive for the open borders the left advocate for.
Nope. Do a better job
yet another attempt at digital ID... we added photos to driving licenses and it still increased
Anyone in the UK that is against biometrics is obviously wanted for something somewhere. Biometrics should be used for tests, entry to England, NHS usage... All this that illegals take for free.
I use it everyday on my phone for banking etc. Should be used for any id request.
I.D. is already required. it simply needs to be managed properly.
The current checks are enough. We need to be extremely cautious of biometric data driven systems becoming normalised. This government is determined to introduce digital ID. We should be resisting every move towards it, or we will soon end up with no freedoms at all!
Driving tests and all other services that are being so shamelessly abused by some people.
Yes I think anything that improves the security and makes it more difficult to prevent driving test fraud should be put in place.
Not sure fingerprints are the solution but some means of validation that cannot be tampered with. Real issue is who has access to the data base & what else it is used for. UK State cannot be trusted from either Privacy, Security or Mission Creep perspectives. Part of the problem is the way DVLC runs things. A lot of fraud can be detected but it seems they are too incompetent or lazy to care but would rather infringe our privacy than do their job.