Twenty-three years ago I worked, undercover, as a minicab driver for a little firm in west London. The idea was to see what went on in a business that was essentially unregulated, find out what cab driving involved and who did it.
It was quite a revelation as it turned out, but not in the way I’d anticipated. The work rather predictably involved lots of sitting around followed by short periods of intense activity with mostly drunk customers, then more sitting around.
What surprised me, though, was that my fellow minicab drivers in this small firm – perhaps 15 or 20 – were without exception from Afghanistan, and most of them were asylum seekers.
If you’re seeking asylum in the UK, you’re not allowed to work until asylum is granted – a lengthy process with an even lengthier appeals system. But not only were these refugees working, they didn’t possess UK driver licences. Nor were most of them insured. In other words, it was an utterly illegal set-up, but the minicab firm was never pursued by the authorities. It eventually went out of business thanks to the arrival of Uber.
I mention this because London is renowned throughout Europe, and far beyond, for being an easy place to find work in the black economy. The food delivery industry, which is enormous, relies heavily on unregistered workers. Security work is also known for turning a blind eye to legal status.
One reason the black economy is so large and open in the UK is that, unlike our European counterparts, we don’t have a national system of identification. In France or Germany or Sweden, it’s much harder to enter the employment market illegally because ID cards, or a digital equivalent, are required.
And that partly explains why so many refugees or migrants are willing to risk crossing the English Channel from France in small and barely seaworthy boats. They’re not fleeing danger, at least not in France, but seeking employment.
So if you were looking to discourage people from making that dangerous crossing, one place to start would be with the introduction of a national system of ID in the UK. Tony Blair tried to do it a few years after my minicab adventures but the policy collapsed under cost concerns and a civil liberties campaign of opposition.
Now, Keir Starmer is trying again with the “Brit card”, but this time his most implacable opponents are the Reform Party, whose main policy is to combat illegal migration. Indeed, they are threatening to unleash widescale deportations if they come to power (which they are currently favourites to do at the next election).
The peculiarities of British politics mean the people who spend all day every day bemoaning the small-boat crossings are also the people who are determined to maintain the UK’s attractiveness to illegal migrants. They claim it’s because they are, on principle, against governments knowing too much about their citizenry.
Yet we live in a digital age in which the citizenry willingly hand over their private details to American social media and tech companies. If we can do that for Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, why can’t we do it for our own government?
I haven’t heard a good answer to that question, perhaps because there isn’t one. In any case, most Britons support the introduction of ID cards. It’s the populists who are against popular opinion. In normal circumstances you’d expect a leader in Starmer’s position to win this one, but the Prime Minister has the unenviable gift of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
I suspect the food delivery industry can rest easy in the knowledge that cheap undocumented labour is destined to remain in ready supply.
Andrew Anthony is an Observer writer and is married to a New Zealander.
