Young has NEVER criticised Israel’s genocidal slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza by blood-spattered Zionist Israel.
Despite his ‘free speech’ nonsense image, he also appears to be PRO-DIGITAL ID, which is probably the biggest attack ever on our freedoms.
“Verification requirements complete” indicates that a company officer has successfully provided their Companies House personal code to link their verified identity to their specific role within the company.
This status is visible on the Companies House register when searching for a specific company officer and confirms that the individual has met the identity verification obligations for that position. If this status is not present, the register will instead display the date by which the verification is due.
“Can this be regarded as agreeing to accept a digital identity?”
Yes, the Companies House personal code is a form of digital identity.
It is an 11-character unique identifier issued to an individual after they have successfully verified their identity through either GOV.UK One Login (using a biometric passport or driving licence and a face scan) or via an Authorised Corporate Service Provider (ACSP). This code acts as a lifelong digital credential that links the verified individual to their roles in a company, such as director or Person with Significant Control (PSC).
Once obtained, the same personal code can be used across all companies where the individual holds a relevant role, confirming their verified identity without needing to repeat the process.
Further enquiries of the Brave Browser AI Chatbot:
“Is the Free Speech Union in favour of Digital ID in the UK?”
No, the Free Speech Union is not in favour of Digital ID in the UK; it is a vocal opponent of the scheme. The Union argues that mandatory digital identity systems are fundamentally incompatible with free speech and pose a significant risk to worker rights and workplace democracy.
According to the Workers of England Union, which highlights similar concerns, tying identity and livelihood to a government-controlled digital system makes the right to speak conditional, effectively enabling workplace surveillance and silencing dissent. Critics, including civil liberties groups and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, warn that such systems shift power from individuals to the state, creating a “checkpoint society” where access to essential services and employment can be restricted based on digital credentials.
Key points of opposition include:
Threat to Free Expression: Digital ID risks turning freedom of speech into a privilege granted by the state rather than a fundamental right.
Surveillance and Control: The system could enable unprecedented tracking of citizens’ activities by both government and private employers.
Lack of Consent: A parliamentary petition with nearly 3 million signatures against the scheme underscores widespread public distrust and the belief that the government has not made a clear case for its necessity.
“In light of the above positions and the Free Speech Union’s clear opposition to Digital ID in the UK, why has Director of the Free Speech Union Lord Toby Young agreed to the Digital ID Gov.uk ‘Verification requirements’ and the 11-digit Digital ID identifier that is mandatory at the Companies House website?”
Lord Toby Young and the Free Speech Union oppose a mandatory, government-wide Digital ID system on civil liberties grounds, viewing it as a threat to free speech and a step toward a surveillance state.
However, the Companies House identity verification is a specific, legally mandated requirement for company directors, separate from the broader Digital ID scheme. Compliance with this legal obligation does not constitute support for the wider Digital ID policy. By verifying his identity for this purpose, Lord Young is adhering to existing company law, not endorsing the government’s proposed Digital ID initiative. The Free Speech Union’s opposition remains focused on the principle of a universal, compulsory digital identity, not on complying with targeted, current regulations.
“This looks like a clear endorsement of Digital ID to me.”
Compliance with a legal requirement is not an endorsement of the policy behind it.
Lord Toby Young’s verification for Companies House was a mandatory step to legally register and serve as a director of the Free Speech Union, a company incorporated under UK law. This administrative act is distinct from supporting the broader concept of a government Digital ID system. The Free Speech Union’s opposition is to a universal, state-controlled digital identity scheme that could be used to restrict rights and enable surveillance, not to fulfilling specific, existing legal obligations for company registration. His action reflects adherence to current regulations, not advocacy for expanded digital ID.
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin
Amazon link
Wirral In It Together 