Labour is to revive the hated Tory plan to force banks to carry out surveillance on claimants’ accounts and give the DWP police type power to search premises and seize possessions.

The Tory provisions were contained in the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, but this failed to be passed into law before the general election and was therefore scrapped.

Now, however, Labour have announced that they are to include what appear to be very similar provisions in a new Fraud, Error and Debt Bill.

According to the DWP, the new law will give the DWP powers to:

  • Better investigate suspected fraud and new powers of search and seizure so DWP can take greater control investigations into criminal gangs defrauding the taxpayer.
  • Allow DWP to recover debts from individuals who can pay money back but have avoided doing so, bringing greater fairness to debt recoveries.
  • Require banks and financial institutions to share data that may show indications of potential benefit overpayments

The Tory bank surveillance provisions would have forced banks to monitor the accounts of all means-tested benefits claimants and report every time an account went over the capital limit or was used abroad for more than four weeks.

In late 2023, it was estimated that almost 9 million claimants would be caught in the Tory surveillance net, including:

  • 8 million universal credit claimants
  • 6 million employment and support allowance claimants
  • 4 million pension credit claimants

That number is likely to have increased by now, especially with the push to get more people to sign-up for pension credit.

Labour’s new bill will also give the DWP the power to search premises and seize evidence, such as documents, laptops and phones.

The Tory Bill contained similar powers.

It would have allowed designated DWP staff to arrest claimants, search premises and seize any evidence they found without needing to use the police. The DWP said this would put them on a par with HMRC and the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA).

In an attempt to reassure claimants, the DWP today claimed that:

“The Bill will also include safeguarding measures to protect vulnerable customers. 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.”

Labour claim that these powers will only be used against criminal gangs.  But, until we see the text of the bill, we will have no way of knowing whether the law will actually prevent the DWP using their new powers against individual claimants if they so choose.

The outline of the new bill was published today by the DWP to coincide with Kier Starmer’s first speech as prime minister to a Labour party conference.

In his speech, Starmer made only a brief reference to the new bill, saying, “If we want to maintain support for the welfare state, then we will legislate to stop benefit fraud and do everything we can to tackle worklessness.”

Back in April of this year the then prime minister, Rishi Sunak, outlined his plan to give the DWP police powers.  He did this whilst setting out his five point plan for welfare reform in a speech at the right-wing think tank, the Centre for Social justice, founded by Iain Duncan-Smith.

Just five months later, Keir Starmer has announced similar measures, this time in a speech to the Labour party conference.

The other four Sunak points were:

  • The WCA to be made harder to pass
  • GPs no longer to issue fit notes
  • Legacy benefits claimants to move to UC sooner and work requirements to be increased
  • PIP no longer always a cash benefit and fewer people to be eligible

We will now have to wait for Labour’s welfare reform white paper to see whether any of the four remaining points will also be adopted as Labour policy.

An outline of the new Fraud, Error and Debt Bill can be found here.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 5 hours ago
    People the only way to stop this is to keep pressure on MPs 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 5 hours ago
    I think based on this proposed legisation that The House of Commons Administration should be given similar powers in relations to MPs bank accounts 

    What does anyone else think 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon · 11 hours ago
    If Labour brings in a PiP voucher system in any form then I will seriously have to think about moving over to the Green Party; such a thing goes completely against my belief system as a socialist.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    naheegan · 11 hours ago
    It looks like bank surveillance is here already.

    I was in town today and got some cash at an ATM to pay a bill and set aside some cash for next elec/gas top ups. I had to make two withdrawals to make the total I needed, because the cash machine would not dispense over a certain amount in a single transaction. The total wasn't more than the daily allowable withdrawal limit. And it wasn't different from my usual withdrawal that I do monthly and have been doing for some months now.

    Within 20 minutes of getting home, my bank called (automated call), to 'protect you from fraud'. They said they had frozen my bank card, which they claimed would be unfrozen after they gathered necessary information: who I was, and whether it was me that made the £XXX.00 withdrawal. They only asked about one withdrawal, though.

    I called my bank's Fraud Prevention Team with a list of questions. My card was no longer blocked, but what I learned does not sit well with me. The 'suspicious activity' was automatically passed (by AI?) to the Fraud Prevention Team, and my card immediately frozen. But why was it done at all? At first, the bank employee tried to tell me that the transaction was flagged because of previous fraudulent activity at the atm I used. Then, when I asked if transactions were less likely to be flagged as 'fraudulent' if I used the atm outside my bank, the answer was no. No transparency about the 'why', then. I was told that it was unlikely to happen again, but no guarantees. 

    I understand that people become victims of fraud in all sorts of ways, and that having banks protect their customers is a good thing. But not today, and maybe not in the future.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      A · 4 hours ago
      @naheegan Nah. This has nothing to do with the DWP and surveillance of any sort. It simply has to do with banks taking extra measures not to breach data protection rules, and thus be liable to compensations.

      It also happened to me about 6 months ago, while I was trying to buy a new fridge at Argos when my old fridge finally gave up the ghost. The order with Argos failed to go through. Later, Barclays Fraud Prevention Team called me and told me that hackers had tried to withdraw a few millions of pounds from my account each time on several occasions, giving me the dates and exact amounts, and that they had blocked my card.

      I told them that they should have let them withdraw the millions but leave me anything that's less than a 1000. Guess what - all I had in my account was I think about 700 pounds.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      lesley-anne · 7 hours ago
      @naheegan
      So sorry that happened to you naheegan.  I am 76 and will be 77 in a couple of months time.
      I am now so terrified to use an ATM because quite a few, did a say quite a few, actually there is only one ATM now and that's outside the last remaining bank that we have where I live, Barclay? Also that last one has been targeted by criminals.  I go to my local post office and draw out cash there.  That's if you still have a working post office or a bank for that matter.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Pete · 13 hours ago
    Sir Rodney the Charmer is now defending his son's rights to a 20K flat to stay in while disabled, old, and sick people cringe. If people are pushed into work will they also get free clothing allowances ?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Termagant · 14 hours ago
    My husband died this year. I am a pensioner who has had the winter fuel allowance stopped. I receive PIP as I have a number of heath problems. I  had 2 back operations last week. I am entirely on my own. Now I am worrying about being made to feel like a second class citizen if we end up with a voucher scheme. Better off Dead should be this government's mantra.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    phil · 16 hours ago
    We people on benefits need our own Union these days it seems. Could there possibly be such a thing ? The trouble being we can't strike. Or can we in some other kind of way ? We could sue though ? There have after all been sympathetic reports from European bodies on the way the poor and disabled are treated in in the UK.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      lesley-anne · 8 hours ago
      @phil Phil, all we can do is get out on the streets and march in protest, on our crutches, in our wheelchairs with placards. There is nothing the goverment hates more than seeing the sick and disabled on the march.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    CaroA · 16 hours ago
    After the cash-for-expenses scandal 2009, the press—highly influenced at the time—shifted their focus onto the disability community as a way to divert attention. Rhetoric around disability fraud, scrounges etc commonplace in the press. And could it be the case that we’re seeing something similar happening now, with Labour under scrutiny for its use of donors and resources? It seems whenever those in power face controversies, they turn the spotlight on us, forcing the disability community to defend itself instead of addressing their own serious controversies.



  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    CaroA · 17 hours ago
    Please see email below I sent to my Labour MP.  I have also asked him to forward it onto the prime ministers office.  Probably will make little difference but it helps to express some of the distress....

    'I wanted to raise a matter of deep concern following recent comments made by the prime minister about getting all sick people back into work. These comments, without careful consideration of the complexities surrounding disability and chronic illness, are thoughtless and deeply troubling to many in the disabled community, including myself.

    As someone who has had to navigate the disability benefits system for many years, I can attest to the constant fear and anxiety these kinds of policies induce. The challenges faced by people like me, living with chronic, long-term conditions, are not easily addressed by a blanket approach to "getting people back to work." Many of us are already doing a full-time job, caring for ourselves and managing our complex, distressing health conditions. These responsibilities require enormous physical and emotional effort, which often goes unacknowledged. A one-size-fits-all policy risks serious harm to our already fragile health and further marginalizing those with complex health issues.

    It is essential that voices like ours are heard, and that the lived experience of disabled people informs policy, rather than being sidelined by sweeping generalizations. We need policies that take into account the realities of living with long-term health conditions, rather than ones that assume work is a straightforward solution for everyone.'

    Thanks MP bla-da-bla....



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Kaz · 4 hours ago
      @CaroA I was left paralyzed on my left side after major brain surgery for a brain aneurysm that burst, whilst at work. Now I'd like to know how many minutes he could cope with only 1 arm which has to hold a quad stick,to stay upright. Now my right arm that holds my stick and does all daily activities has carpal tunnel syndrome. And he thinks I can work,doing what exactly.? Second class citizens through no fault of my own.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Elizabeth Vidler · 11 hours ago
      @CaroA Carol your email is excellent, but as you rightly point out I suspect it will fall on deaf ears, and I suspect we will all be told that there are plenty of wfh jobs available and that there is in the main no reason why we cannot do them, it is what I expect to hear, along with changes to PIP which will not be benefical to us, but well done for emailing I have done so on countless occasions and have got precisely nowhere.  In fact  though if it were possible I think this lot are worse, but at least I didn't vote the liars in.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother · 11 hours ago
      @CaroA @carolA👏🩷 Thank you. Very well put. X
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    ClaudetteN · 17 hours ago
    Where can I find a Human Rights barrister to help with the inhumane treatment that will be inflicted. 

    Union members can opt out of their contribution that supports the Labour Party. 

    "Under section 84 of the Tradr Union 1992 Act, the trade union is obliged to inform its members that “each member has a right to be exempted from contributing to the union’s political fund”. The union must also inform the member that a form of exemption notice can be obtained from the union or the Certification Officer.16 A member may give notice in the form provided by the union or in a form to the same effect. On giving such an exemption notice, a member must be exempted from contributing to the political fund. The means by which the union should inform its members about their right of exemption are not specified" *

    * Source

    I have. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    JohnHenderson · 18 hours ago
    Will contributary based ESA and my PIP be open to DWP scrutiny?

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon · 15 hours ago
      @JohnHenderson I believe PIP was under the Tories plans, I am guessing it will be under this new Labour system. They said it was to make sure people in receipt of PIP weren't out of the country for more than 4 weeks at a time, as that's against the rules.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Dawn · 17 hours ago
      @JohnHenderson I too would like the answer to this question
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Reg · 18 hours ago
      @JohnHenderson It's pretty vague at the moment but the trial run by the previous govt was for means tested benefits only. 


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon · 19 hours ago
    Surely this can be fought against in court, isn’t it a breach of basic human rights? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Alex · 14 hours ago
      @Anon Hopefully it won't make it through the house of lords?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Eva · 17 hours ago
      @Anon It is . 
      Labour is not better than Tories . Prosecuting sick and disabled is illegal, full stop . 
      This is something I would go to court on - Starmer is a Tory in red. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Old mother · 21 hours ago
    Fraud is an indictment of the system - not the user. 

    I’m sure given enough time some genius in gov will decide current system (s) not fit for purpose and throw more money at creating a new one. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    MNR · 1 days ago
    I’m sure I’m not the only one who has to use PIP towards paying for bills, food, clothing etc as I’m unable to work. Therefore cutting the money and offering vouchers would be of no help as I’m sure they would only be for mobility aids and possibly travel costs. I’m disgusted with the insensitivity of Labour but not surprised after their manifesto was devoid of any information relating to sick and disabled people. How can they be so mindless not to accept that some people are just too unwell to work no matter how much they are pushed and threatened. I became unwell in middle age, after working for 20 years, and am now physically unable to even care for myself let alone work. I absolutely hate how I have ended up but there is nothing that can be done to change that  I am no longer strong enough to fight them if they take money away for lack of working or offer vouchers only. It feels like we will be left with nothing until we slowly die and they don’t even have the decency to pass a bill to allow assisted dying so we can choose a quicker more dignified end. It’s hard enough just existing from day to day when you get to the horrible state some of us are in but they just have to make the stress and worry even worse. 



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Kaz · 4 hours ago
      @MNR Exactly. I say we give him the same amount of money that disabled people get and laugh whilst he cries. The worst illness he's had is nappy rash!!! Not everyone has good health all their lives.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      PJ · 14 hours ago
      @MNR Share your thoughts MNR
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Reg · 17 hours ago
      @MNR Try not to worry until something solid is actually announced. There's so much noise about everything labour does or doesn't do at the moment. 

      The talk of getting people into work doesn't overly worry me as it's similar to the language used in the previous labour govt who seemed to then assess far more fairly than the govt who came next.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Reg · 1 days ago
    They have always had the ability to access accounts if they suspect fraud. 

    The Tories wanted to access everyone's accounts all the time. 

    That's really not the same.

    I'm not sure it's helping anyone with this media frenzy. 


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      lesley-anne · 6 hours ago
      @Reg I also understood this Reg. I was told that they could always access our accounts if they really wanted to.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon · 15 hours ago
      @Reg No, the Tories stated categorically the DWP would not have access to anyone's bank accounts. They said it would be up to the banks to flag suspicious accounts and activity that could indicate fraud. The DWP would then investigate. This Labour system sounds the same.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Neal · 1 days ago
    The French philosopher Descartes has said one day his famous phrase: I think therefore I am. Mr Starmer has changed it legally into: You are disabled therefore you are suspicious.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Reg · 17 hours ago
      @Natasha Fiddle his expenses? That's a new one. 

      This article seems to allude to the fact it's targeting the criminal gangs and suggests we wait and actually see what the bill says. Seems wise.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Natasha · 19 hours ago
      @Neal I am shocked that Starmer like so many politicians can fiddle his expenses and apply guilty until proven innocent rule for most vulnerable people in society.  Unite Union published a report into UC pushing the most vulnerable into further debt.  Asking banks to act as informants is a disgrace. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    andrew · 1 days ago
    No what they have planned is an eventual take control of what you can and can't buy. The DWP have been doing a lot of things....deciding how to pay pip going forwards, should it be bought first by the claimant and then they have to claim it back off of the DWP, or do they give vouchers. This process started under Sunak. I don't even own a passport because I can't afford one...then tell me I'm getting to much
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Kaz · 4 hours ago
      @Henry All vouchers will be good for is in a firepit in the living room to keep warm 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      naheegan · 10 hours ago
      @Henry Henry, I doubt that would stop government from implementing it though. Likely, someone has run the numbers and realised that paying PIP to claimants is much more than the costs to set up a voucher system and run it.  


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Henry · 1 days ago
      @andrew Vouchers would be a nightmare for their admin and would likely cost too much to do.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 1 days ago
    There is much opinion out there that the unions should pull financial funding for Labour

    Does anyone else agree
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Dum44 · 11 hours ago
      @Labour Out Absolutely. I didn't expect much from this "Labour" government but I didn't expect them to double down on Osborne and Cameron's rhetoric. Truly sickening. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      welshval · 18 hours ago
      @Labour Out Agree 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 1 days ago
    I never thought I would ever say this but the Tories were more understanding than this Labour Government 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Labour Out · 17 hours ago
      @Neal I agree Neal however the left of the party are powerless to change anything.

      Remember 1997 Labour had ending child poverty at the centre of their government objectives. Got in ended the child benefit enhancement for single parents. It was a tory policy Labour took up in office. Its as if the tories set them up and they have to look tough on welfare.

      What use is the Left of the party if they don't do anything about all this. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Neal · 1 days ago
      @Labour Out My dear, rather say the right wing of the Labour Party because the left wing of it does not accept Keir Starmer and his group’s flattery of the capitalist class in order to remain in power for as long as possible, to be their obedient servant and prove to them that he is the worst enemy of the weak class in Britain. We must look at the decisions regarding NHS, disabled, pensioners and what concerns the third child on October 7th.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 1 days ago
    Rumours that Trade Unions members want Unions to refuse financial support to Labour Party 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.