The poor are being vilified and stigmatised as the cause not only of their own plight but of the economic mess that Britain is in (the rest of the world is of not much interest to those inclined to get hot under the collar about benefit fraud). It is an exercise in distraction. Political distraction. The Con bit of the ConDems are creating a smoke screen for their mates in the city (…nice one George, cheers old man!). The only other motive is crude class hatred of ordinary people who dare to ask for anything from the system other than to be exploited and oppressed.
And the latest wheeze by the Con/Dems (or as David Cameron put it, ‘using modern technologies in dealing with benefit fraud’) is using credit reference agencies as ‘bounty hunters’ (sounds like the Wild West) tracking benefit fraudsters. Surreal but true. It raises questions of which accuracy, accountability and access are just three. Who will see this information and where else will it go?? You can just imagine the cock-ups happenings, can’t you. People of same or similar names being mixed up, people moving around, incomplete information….and more cock-ups can be imagined. It will end in tears and not the Con/Dems unfortunately.
But the agencies are not accountable for errors such as people being wrongly harassed by debt collectors or unfairly refused credit. It’s a Kafkaesque world where the credit agencies absolve themselves of responsibility for their material, saying it is how the banks and other organisations use it that counts – and that’s beyond their control. Question the banks, however, and they say they have no option other than to follow the information from the credit reference agencies. So it is beyond their control as well.
These proposals don’t make sense. How can you possibly find someone cheating the benefits system by using Experian? It’s policy making on the hoof. Also, why bring in credit rating agencies to deal with the benefits system, to deal with an area they have no expertise or knowledge (but as we know that hasn’t stopped previous governments bringing in private companies who know jack about the benefits system)?
Work and Pensions Minister Chris Grayling told the BBC: “This is data that is publicly available, that is publicly on sale, that’s available to – not go into the fine detail of what you spend – but overall to set out spending patterns, what loans you have taken out, your overall patterns of spending in your life.
“And if there’s a huge mismatch between the way you are living your life and the amount of money you are supposed to be receiving from the state on benefits, surely it is right and proper that we should be saying: ‘How is that happening?’”
Ok, take this example, say someone has just become unemployed their spending patterns will be shifting dramatically, they may have more money than someone who has been unemployed for a longer period. There will be significant differences, what about the person who has some redundancy money?
This is an ideological attack by the Con/Dems on the public sector, the public sector is about the common good while the private sector is based on greed, profit and incentives, plus in the long term it will cost the state more money. It will also cost the poor a hell of a lot more through benefits being wrongly taken away and that’s a stark reality. It will create more misery and poverty.
Exactly. People fraudulently claiming benefits (which comprise only 1% of benefit claimants) will simply avoid paying for their plasma tvs with credit cards and use cash to buy things with their cash-in-hand earnings. Not sure how Experian is going to spot that through trawling through people’s bank statements.
Then there’s the problem with Cameron’s accounting. He says that the tax payer is being cheated of £5bn when in actual fact the sum is closer to £1bn. However, by citing this figure he seeks cover to bring in the bounty hunters – the scale of the cheating is so bad we have to do this – and justifying why the opening up our private information to data-mining by Experian is a good thing. They are already promising they will be able to reduce the welfare spending bill by £1bn a year. This while some £10bn in benefits remains unclaimed.
Then of course there’s the £90bn of tax fraud elephant sitting in the sitting room that nobody wants to mention. Of course Cameron’s not going after this because the plan is to dismantle the welfare state, not punish those who defraud the state of these billions. Couple that with the news that HMRC are not going to be publishing full annual accounts and reports which means it will be harder in future to hold HMRC accountable for failure to collect revenues due the state.
Spot-on, their_vodka!!
Thinking of starting a rumour that Jersey has oil….
Seriously though, they could so easily shut down these tax havens. Also, with the cuts in the public sector there will be less people to collect revenues (and they have already been cut) so there is billions outstanding.
“and use cash to buy things with their cash-in-hand earnings”
Paying in cash? They’re clearly a terrorist, then.
No-one has addressed the issue of how much of benefits fraud is organised crime setting up false identities. That obviously can’t be tracked through accessing credit card information. This is just an excuse for creating another economic opportunity in harrassing the poorest.
Seriously though, they could so easily shut down these tax havens. Also, with the cuts in the public sector there will be less people to collect revenues (and they have already been cut) so there is billions outstanding.
Transfer of public funds to line the coffers of private companies trumps accuracy, accountability and access every time. Stigmatising the poor or those in receipt of benefits adds extra brownie points. Together with the benefits to private shareholders this is just too much for this government to ignore.
Since Experian (and others) are making so much £ out of our spending habits, perhaps it’s time we started demanding copyright, royalties and rights over that information…
Excellent suggestion, I’m sure there’s mileage in using a tactic like that.