They say that a fraud, error and debt bill will require banks and other financial institutions to share data that may help identify benefit fraud as part of a package of measures designed to “catch fraudsters faster” and save £1.6bn over five years:
Campaigners warned ministers against adopting any legislation based too closely on the previous government’s widely criticised data protection and digital information bill, which had similar anti-benefit fraud aspirations.
When that bill – condemned by campaigners as an invasion of privacy likely to disproportionately affect older and disabled claimants – was passing through parliament Labour opposed amendments that required banks to share their customers’ data with the department to help it tackle benefit fraud.
The government said the new bill will include enhanced measures to protect vulnerable claimants, and establish safeguards to ensure the new powers are not misused by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
The DWP said: “Staff will be trained to the highest standards on the appropriate use of any new powers, and we will introduce new oversight and reporting mechanisms, to monitor these new powers. DWP will not have access to people’s bank accounts and will not share their personal information with third parties.”
'''
Silkie Carlo, Big Brother Watch’s director, said: “Everyone wants fraud to be dealt with, and the government already has strong powers to investigate the bank statements of suspects.
“But to force banks to constantly spy on benefits recipients without suspicion means that not only millions of disabled people, pensioners and carers will be actively spied on but the whole population’s bank accounts are likely to be monitored for no good reason.
She added: “A financial snooper’s charter targeted to automate suspicion of our country’s poorest is intrusive, unjustified and risks Horizon-style injustice on a mass scale.”
Crossbench peer Beeban Kidron said she hoped the new government was not proposing to resurrect the “egregious proposals” made by the last one. She said: “If the government introduces spyware as previously proposed, I will oppose it with the ferocity that Labour colleagues in opposition did.”
Caroline Selman, a researcher for the Public Law Project charity, said the bill raised questions about whether ministers had learned lessons from the last proposal. “If they are serious about building trust in government use of technology, introducing invasive powers of surveillance with a high risk of harm is not the way to do it,” she said.
Important as it is to tackle fraud the new Labour government need to tread carefully here, and make sure that they get it right.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I am happy to address most contributions, even the drunken ones if they are coherent, but I am not going to engage with negative sniping from those who do not have the guts to add their names or a consistent on-line identity to their comments. Such postings will not be published.
Anonymous comments with a constructive contribution to make to the discussion, even if it is critical will continue to be posted. Libellous comments or remarks I think may be libellous will not be published.
I will also not tolerate personation so please do not add comments in the name of real people unless you are that person. If you do not like these rules then start your own blog.
Oh, and if you persist in repeating yourself despite the fact I have addressed your point I may get bored and reject your comment.
The views expressed in comments are those of the poster, not me.