Is the London Bullion Market going to implode

[Deleted User]

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

I’d be very surprised if digital ID even happens. If anything I’d imagine it would push the price up, with people wanting more privacy and trading in cash or metals only.

It already has happened. Passports have been electronic (with a physical counterpart) since 1988. Ten years later a digital photograph and signature were added, and biometrics from 2006. Meanwhile the first centralised driving licence database was introduced in the 1970s with the paper counterpart being abolished in 2015. Over 90% of the UK adult population are opted in to one or both digital ID systems. It is just that the subject of the database doesn't yet have electronic access to their own data in order to prove their identity using electronic means. Credit reference agencies allow others to perform digital checks, but if those fail, database subjects must fall back on sharing original/certified paper or plastic documents (which can then be cross referenced with the digital ID record) - a rather inconvenient and insecure process.

The number who have opted out of the passport, driving licence, and credit account systems must be a tiny minority, and not all of them will be doing so to stay under the radar. So it seems unlikely the hold-outs will cause any sort of global impact on precious metal prices.

You are being slightly disingenuous here. We are discussing recently enacted legislation in regards to “digital ID” as announced by the UK government in September 2025, not existing systems. 

I’m not being disingenuous, I’m putting the topic in context and highlighting that the September 2025 proposals don't create a new surveillance state or gather any additional information for the vast majority. They simply create a framework for some of the data that the government and credit agencies have held on us for decades. If the existence of a digital ID were going to drive people toward gold and silver, that 'rush' should have happened when the DVLA digitised or when passports became biometric. The new legislation is largely about creation of a user interface - moving that existing data from a paper booklet or plastic card in your wallet to a website or app on your phone. The rest of the infrastructure already exists.

If someone hasn't felt the need to exit the banking system while their entire financial history and biometric profile were already stored digitally, it’s hard to see why giving them a level of access to that data themselves would suddenly trigger a collapse in confidence in banking that would be sufficient to move the price of gold or silver.

The historical context is also important to understand for those doubting the new measures will ever happen. The initial legislation on establishing the digital verification services trust framework was passed in June 2025, 3 months before the September announcement. This will be a decentralised system with GOV.UK One Login as its foundation. The 2022 Voter ID legislation was the "proof of concept" that the public would comply with mandatory ID requirements if framed as a security measure. The 2025 legislation is just the next step and formalisation of a process that has been running as a pilot since 2021. There has been an ever growing mandate from the public for successive governments to ensure that only those legally entitled can be here, and access work and state services, so the new legislation will widen the scope from voter fraud to the more general protection of the taxpayer.

I am afraid I must again state to you, what we are discussing is the introduction of digital ID, as announced in September. Not any other existing systems. I will also re-add a line from my last post which you appear to have not quoted. "I understand these systems may eventually be part of it." So I am afraid I am aware of most of the info in your post already. As I have already mentioned, I was part of the initial trial managed by Barclays and the Post office, way before any of the current system was planned.

If there was to be a rush due to the introduction of digital ID, it will happen when it's introduced. All of the systems and legislation do not enter the mind of the average voter. Only when it is in front of them, will it cause "the rush", which I don't believe it will. 

I have linked to an archive of Digital ID fiasco so far. 

https://order-order.com/tag/digital-id/

It’s interesting that you were part of those early trials, as it gives you a first hand knowledge on how long the state has been iterating on this. However, that’s exactly why I've focused on the existing systems. To suggest that these databases might eventually be part of the 2025 system is putting the cart before the horse. Those systems aren't just potential additions - they are the finished foundation upon which the 2025 mandate is built. The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 is already law, and as of 1st December, the statutory Trust Framework is officially in force. The announcement was only made once the legislative and technical plumbing was already in place. From here it is just a bit of wiring and creation of a user interface.
You mention that the details don’t "enter the mind" of the average voter, but I would argue that is exactly why a rush to metals is so unlikely. Most voters don't realise they have already transitioned because the change was incremental. When 33 million people use the NHS App, or millions more use GOV.UK One Login to manage their taxes, they are already active subjects of a digital identity system. The 2025 announcement isn't a shock introduction of a new concept - it is simply the moment the government 'plugs in' that existing plumbing to a mandatory requirement for employment. Like those earlier systems, it won't feel like a revolution to the average voter when they provide a digital code to an employer instead of handing over a physical passport to be photocopied and stored.
The reason there won't be a rush is that people don't abandon a system they are already comfortably using just because its legal framework is formalised. If a voter hasn't fled to precious metals despite their biometrics and financial history being digitised for over a decade, it's hard to see why a shift in the method of verification would trigger such a radical move. If they haven't realised by now, will they ever?
As for the 'fiasco' element, I agree that government IT projects are often bureaucratic messes. But this tends to lead to a broken website and public frustration for a period of time, not a systemic collapse of confidence in the currency.

Once a person has to have a "digital ID' and it is called that, and it is on their phone, that is when we will see. Until then it doesn't exist in the mind of the voter. 

masonic

[Deleted User] said:

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

masonic said:

[Deleted User] said:

I’d be very surprised if digital ID even happens. If anything I’d imagine it would push the price up, with people wanting more privacy and trading in cash or metals only.

It already has happened. Passports have been electronic (with a physical counterpart) since 1988. Ten years later a digital photograph and signature were added, and biometrics from 2006. Meanwhile the first centralised driving licence database was introduced in the 1970s with the paper counterpart being abolished in 2015. Over 90% of the UK adult population are opted in to one or both digital ID systems. It is just that the subject of the database doesn't yet have electronic access to their own data in order to prove their identity using electronic means. Credit reference agencies allow others to perform digital checks, but if those fail, database subjects must fall back on sharing original/certified paper or plastic documents (which can then be cross referenced with the digital ID record) - a rather inconvenient and insecure process.

The number who have opted out of the passport, driving licence, and credit account systems must be a tiny minority, and not all of them will be doing so to stay under the radar. So it seems unlikely the hold-outs will cause any sort of global impact on precious metal prices.

You are being slightly disingenuous here. We are discussing recently enacted legislation in regards to “digital ID” as announced by the UK government in September 2025, not existing systems. 

I’m not being disingenuous, I’m putting the topic in context and highlighting that the September 2025 proposals don't create a new surveillance state or gather any additional information for the vast majority. They simply create a framework for some of the data that the government and credit agencies have held on us for decades. If the existence of a digital ID were going to drive people toward gold and silver, that 'rush' should have happened when the DVLA digitised or when passports became biometric. The new legislation is largely about creation of a user interface - moving that existing data from a paper booklet or plastic card in your wallet to a website or app on your phone. The rest of the infrastructure already exists.

If someone hasn't felt the need to exit the banking system while their entire financial history and biometric profile were already stored digitally, it’s hard to see why giving them a level of access to that data themselves would suddenly trigger a collapse in confidence in banking that would be sufficient to move the price of gold or silver.

The historical context is also important to understand for those doubting the new measures will ever happen. The initial legislation on establishing the digital verification services trust framework was passed in June 2025, 3 months before the September announcement. This will be a decentralised system with GOV.UK One Login as its foundation. The 2022 Voter ID legislation was the "proof of concept" that the public would comply with mandatory ID requirements if framed as a security measure. The 2025 legislation is just the next step and formalisation of a process that has been running as a pilot since 2021. There has been an ever growing mandate from the public for successive governments to ensure that only those legally entitled can be here, and access work and state services, so the new legislation will widen the scope from voter fraud to the more general protection of the taxpayer.

I am afraid I must again state to you, what we are discussing is the introduction of digital ID, as announced in September. Not any other existing systems. I will also re-add a line from my last post which you appear to have not quoted. "I understand these systems may eventually be part of it." So I am afraid I am aware of most of the info in your post already. As I have already mentioned, I was part of the initial trial managed by Barclays and the Post office, way before any of the current system was planned.

If there was to be a rush due to the introduction of digital ID, it will happen when it's introduced. All of the systems and legislation do not enter the mind of the average voter. Only when it is in front of them, will it cause "the rush", which I don't believe it will. 

I have linked to an archive of Digital ID fiasco so far. 

https://order-order.com/tag/digital-id/

It’s interesting that you were part of those early trials, as it gives you a first hand knowledge on how long the state has been iterating on this. However, that’s exactly why I've focused on the existing systems. To suggest that these databases might eventually be part of the 2025 system is putting the cart before the horse. Those systems aren't just potential additions - they are the finished foundation upon which the 2025 mandate is built. The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 is already law, and as of 1st December, the statutory Trust Framework is officially in force. The announcement was only made once the legislative and technical plumbing was already in place. From here it is just a bit of wiring and creation of a user interface.
You mention that the details don’t "enter the mind" of the average voter, but I would argue that is exactly why a rush to metals is so unlikely. Most voters don't realise they have already transitioned because the change was incremental. When 33 million people use the NHS App, or millions more use GOV.UK One Login to manage their taxes, they are already active subjects of a digital identity system. The 2025 announcement isn't a shock introduction of a new concept - it is simply the moment the government 'plugs in' that existing plumbing to a mandatory requirement for employment. Like those earlier systems, it won't feel like a revolution to the average voter when they provide a digital code to an employer instead of handing over a physical passport to be photocopied and stored.
The reason there won't be a rush is that people don't abandon a system they are already comfortably using just because its legal framework is formalised. If a voter hasn't fled to precious metals despite their biometrics and financial history being digitised for over a decade, it's hard to see why a shift in the method of verification would trigger such a radical move. If they haven't realised by now, will they ever?
As for the 'fiasco' element, I agree that government IT projects are often bureaucratic messes. But this tends to lead to a broken website and public frustration for a period of time, not a systemic collapse of confidence in the currency.

Once a person has to have a "digital ID' and it is called that, and it is on their phone, that is when we will see. Until then it doesn't exist in the mind of the voter. 

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding here of how digital ID will work. It isn't something that lives on your phone. The app on your phone connects to the government system and allows you to generate codes that the recipient can use to access your data on the relevant government database. You don’t hand over your phone to an employer any more than you hand over your phone to a shop assistant when using Apple Pay. You'll either read out an access code or let them scan a QR code, which the employer will then enter/scan into their system to gain access to the verification that is required - from its own link to a government database, not your phone.

The app will probably be called something similar to GOV.UK One Login and it will be used for various purposes, including to "generate access code". So I doubt it will ever be a "digital ID" on their phone in the mind of the voter, any more than the NHS App or GOV.UK One Login website is today. Though I'm sure certain parts of the media will try their best to give that impression to voters.

[Deleted User]

I can’t be more clearer i’m afraid. You haven’t understood anything I have said. We are talking about the average person and what they will perceive digital ID to be. Clearly the realms of conspiracy are difficult to counter. Happy Christmas all.

masonic

[Deleted User] said:

I can’t be more clearer i’m afraid. You haven’t understood anything I have said. We are talking about the average person and what they will perceive digital ID to be. Clearly the realms of conspiracy are difficult to counter. Happy Christmas all.

I do understand what you are saying. Fear can be more powerful than facts, and if the flames are fanned sufficiently, it can certainly cultivate opposition. However, my argument is that the government has successfully bypassed that shock moment by making the transition so incremental.

By the time the mandatory Right to Work checks go live in 2029, the average person won't be seeing a new, scary system - they’ll just be seeing an update to the tools they’ve used for years. Those 33 million people using the NHS App have already quietly accepted a digital identity system to manage their most sensitive health data. The newly announced measures simply plug that existing comfort into a new scenario. Most people only start a new job once every few years, the digital ID moment will be a rare, low-friction event - a 30-second QR scan instead of digging out their passport to take into work to be photocopied. Convenience usually neutralises the fear that fuels conspiracy theories. For the vast majority, the perception won't be one of state overreach, but of personal admin becoming slightly easier.

ColdIron

Don't forget the next component in the chain, GOV.UK Wallet. It will work much as Apple or Google Wallet does today and serves much the same purpose. Its use will be optional but like its commercial brothers will bring convenience

As for implementing One Login for future projects or within existing infrastructure, it's already live. You can read the broad technical documentation here and some of the more detailed technical documentation here with detailed coding examples to implement or embed it. Of course, if you really want to you can also read and review all the source code on Github here, because it’s all open source.