Speakers include: @kerenweitzberg.bsky.social @silviahedley.bsky.social @margchee.bsky.social Andreas Hackl @deryaozkul.bsky.social @rachelcoldicutt.bsky.social Sanjay Sharma, Kim Snooks

Given that people is asking me for the numbers, here the table provided by UKRI:

such a project now (given the profound challenges this country faces), whose interests it serves, and to what extent it reflects the influence of non-elected bodies (e.g. the Tony Blair Institute).

Assuming it is voluntary, privacy preserving, follows robust data protection principles (non-traceability etc), I wouldn't automatically object to the GOV.UK wallet (though the devil is in the details). It certainly follows EU trends. But it’s perfectly legitimate to ask why the govt is pursuing...

On my end, my main objection is to the 'Britcard'--a compulsory digital ID/credential that will expand 'hostile environment' policies, which looks very much like a reactive response to the moral panic around asylum seekers. Plus no real discussion about how gov't will avoid another Windrush Scandal.

This report builds on the great work of the Future of Wakimbizi project and the Refugee-Led Research Hub. @qmpoliticsir.bsky.social

As resettlement opportunities diminish & humanitarian aid budgets are slashed, integration into host countries is increasingly being seen as the only durable solution for refugees. Nut how will integration be meaningfully achieved if digital identity systems exclude non-citizens?

How can integration be realized if refugees are denied work permits and Conventional Travel Documents? Are integration schemes just containment by another name? And how do these questions intersect with broader debates about digital public infrastructure?