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.
    Lill · 1 days ago
    Just found out the house of lords get a say on benefits  cuts bill ect they can chose to chuck out government proposals I've seen info on the .gov information they chucked out cuts to ESA in 2016 the government tried to appeal twice and lost please look at this as I think there's hope that labour will get the cuts chucked out if lords say no to a bill the government want to pass then it's no.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jon · 1 days ago
      @Matt Ok thanks
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Matt · 1 days ago
      @Matt I should also have added that if, for example, the House of Lords were to reject or substantially amend, any future legislation in relation to welfare reform, this can be overturned by the House of Commons once the Bill returns from the Lords.  Recent examples of this include legislation in relation to Brexit, and Rwanda immigration legislation (subsequently dropped by the new Labour Government).  Therefore it can take time for Government legislation to become law, especially if it is contentious. It would help if Labour had a majority of 24 rather than 174.  Therefore, legal challenges to any proposed changes to PIP, UC etc are the likely route.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Matt · 1 days ago
      @Jon In answer to your questions, the House of Lords can block/amend bills for up to two years, WITH THE EXCEPTION of money bills (ie, those announced in the Budget).  This is due to the 1911 Parliament Act, before that the Conservative dominated House of Lords kept blocking David Lloyd-George's People's Budget.  Therefore, if there were to be changes announced in the budget I don't think the Lord's will be able to assist; if it is primary legislation then it can be either blocked, or amended.  And of course there is the option of a Judicial Review which would probably go all the way to the Supreme Court as the Govt are very keen to save money under 'welfare'
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jon · 1 days ago
      @Lill Does the house of lords over rule parliament then
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother · 2 days ago
    I had a bank check completed sept last year. Did a few mins on the phone to answer questions,nothing major, though it's hard on calls for me as I get tongue tied and my brain fog kicks in , the man was patient and decent. He told me after he recieved the bank statements he'd let me know the outcome and return them to me,which he did. Telling me all was in order ,I'm still on IResa ,for now that is until the dreaded UC migration letter arrives. I hope if any of you have to do the bank statement thing it will be straightforward for you all also.
    First thing in dealing with benefits for many years that was.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Lill · 2 days ago
    This seems to be weird is it because labour know they won't get everyone off disability benefits so they come up with this thinking it's away to to scare people so they give up their claims ? Don't think it will work With all labours secrets coming out about their gifts from their donors undeclared I think their will be alot of rebellion and these books from John pring clearly haven't been looked at by alot of them but I think one of the labour MPs resigning along with the gifts situation will put pressure on labour to u turn at the budget because as it was put by one MP they won't go through with every benefit cut as they'll be scared of the noise they've already faced a bashing from every corner and their scores in the polls are bad if you put everything said here together their unlikely to cut every disabled persons support because they won't want to lose the next election their is a chance we could see a repeat of what Liz truss did a total crash on the country if reeves go to far with investment spending .
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Simon · 2 days ago
      @Lill I understand the situation from their point of view and it's complex. There have been cases of serious fraud taking place, with gangs basically running multiple false claims and costing the tax payer 10s to 100s of £1000s annually, along with individuals sitting on "serious" capital yet still claiming welfare payments. So yes, there are problems within the current system and policing is basically the only way to address the problem. The question remains though, is it an infringement of individual rights to have one's account(s) open to scrutiny without prior consent?

      I don't think this is an effort by the government to scare claimants away or terrorise the vulnerable, although I have to say, this will potentially occur (imo) in very specific cases, where a person is running on high anxiety and paranoia.

      We don't understand the particulars of the bill yet or when this will be fully implemented etc.

      There is so much doom & gloom in the air at this time and I share a measure of this, but refuse to entirely surrender myself to dread and pointless rumination, when I know that the broad majority of us are not criminals and should not have to "feel" this way, nor suffer a burden of shame and discrimination when attempting to navigate the system.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    A · 3 days ago
    I lost hope and gave up on Liz Kendall when:

    1. She got appointed the shadow secretary of state for the DWP and she said that she had always been dreaming of holding this post one day, as I heavily doubted this dream was to be supportive of ill and disabled people.

    2. She started to parrot dishonestly and misleadingly that millions of people who wanted to work were written off-sick, as if these were written off-sick against their will or without their consent.

    3. She started to parrot that claimants had a duty to engage, which is a phrase she got from the report of Alain Millburn, who recommended in his report (which you can read yourself as it's available on the internet) that all sick and disabled people should have a duty to engage with work coaches and be reviewed more frequently by work coaches.

    4. So many organisations have written to her sharing their various concerns, and tantamount of petitions and enquiries have been submitted to her by different bodies and that she has remained silent to date and has never replied to these enquiries, petitions, letters, etc.,  

    Needless to add that, in 2015, she and Harriet Harman were the only members from Labour who had voted for the child benefit cap and cap for benefits in general.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon · 3 days ago
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/cost-of-living/dwp-asks-universal-credit-claimants-30044818

    They are already checking accounts even before the banks begin the automated reporting of suspicious activity.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jon · 3 days ago
      @Anon If you go to your bank branch and ask for 4 months of bank statements they might not be able to do it just at that moment it could be a hassle
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Ani · 3 days ago
    All that government contrition over the Post Office scandal...
    A couple months later Labour sweeps to power and what's at the top of their to do list? Grant HMRC and DWP quasi police powers to search, question and charge (vulnerable) people.😳
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    axab43 · 4 days ago
    A lot of these comments are very negative and disturbing. My doctor said Keir Starmer is after those who can work and don't.  He is not saying everyone, even those with  severe mental and phyiscal health problems can work.  

    Some of these comments just send those who already have depression and anxiety into a far worse state.  There are one or two that are more level headed.  Ie this has all been tried before by past Governments and it is never as severe as it sounds at the beginning.   Can we think about this as mental ill health is very real for a few of us and this "we are all for it" attitude really does not help without balance!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jon · 2 days ago
      @axab43 I think starmer wants 90 percent of us looking for work with adaptations only the terminally I'll are excused
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      HRH · 3 days ago
      @Matt can i remind you that all major health conditions are initially diagnosed by a consultant following xrays/scans/blood work/assessments/screening tools and then monitored via a GP.  who may or may not, refer back to the consultant if required.
      🙏
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      A · 3 days ago
      @axab43 Then, he should be more clear. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      A · 4 days ago
      @axab43 My advice is: "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst".
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      A · 4 days ago
      @Anon Keir Starmer has suggested that all claimants of long-term sickness benefits will be expected to look for work under his government’s plans to reform social security.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Clare · 6 days ago
     Many peoples husband/wife or partners  do not have joint accounts Would my husbands accounts be included ? Or for that matter any other person in the household ? Being spied on
    Once again the sick and the lame are to be treated as thieves and malingerers Which feeds into the general public Which causes people with disabilities and illness to be treated as frauds and wastrels 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Simon · 2 days ago
      @Clare Try not to worry at the moment - nobody really understands what's going on. I know it's easy to get caught up in anxiety (tell me about it!) - none of this will be implemented immediately anyway, so best try to relax and see what happens.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Claire Jones · 7 days ago
    With any luck, backlash within the party and Labour MP's will water this bill down. A massive majority means more division for the party. Additionally, if you live in Scotland or Wales, with Labour promising further devolution over their tenure, you could be blanketed from this bill's decision hopefully. I think all of us agree that fraud gangs do need to be cracked down on as they give the rest of us who are genuinely sick and disabled a bad name, but what's concerning for every one of us is how many innocent people will be taken down with them? The budget next month will be the meat and bones of mostly good things, but the welfare state will be the real worry. It will tell us all where Labour stands in the next 5 years of governing. Will they target the countless amount of fraud and tax dodging by the richest? All signs so far show they will, but the recent Winter Fuel Allowance removal for pensioners shows otherwise. They are truly a confusing party to comprehend right now. At least with the Tories we knew what we were getting from them.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    A · 7 days ago
    Keir Starmer saying that "there should be more support to help people back to work" is all a lie. Keir Starmer's plan is all about cutting the welfare budget and cutting benefits to as many claimants as possible. This is exactly what David Cameron used to claim - helping unemployed people get good jobs, while forcing people to do unpaid jobs and murmuring that claimants needed to work for and earn their benefits, until he finally confessed that it was all about cutting the welfare budget and cutting benefits to as many claimants as possible.

    Keir Starmer is nothing but the other face of the same evil and cruel coin.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Hazel Dean · 8 days ago
    I am disabled.  I don't want to be.  I go through pain and exhaustion every day.  I did not ask to be like this.  Why should I be treated as a pariah and a waste of money. I have been working for 50 years and have destroyed the remaining good health I had in the last 2 years trying to support myself and my disabled son. So now Labour want to treat us as did the Tories. I really would like one of them to meet me face-to-face and tell me what I did to warrant this blame and ill treatment. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon · 4 days ago
      @Hazel Dean Are you state pension age, if you've been working for 50 years? If you are then the migration won't affect you.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Michael Reid · 8 days ago
    IMO if they take away cash payments especially from people who have hidden disabilities this would increase the crime rate and cause mayhem.If u are disabled through no fault of your own and cannot work why should you be treated as a 3rd class citizen, surely everyone deserves the right to live an enjoyable life.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Matt · 8 days ago
    with Labour's focus on getting sick and disabled people back into work....I thought I would share some experience to demonstrate how difficult this is going to be with employers.

    I work in the insurance industry and we have set up a number of networks under DE & I.  As part of the disability awareness forum, yesterday in our office we had an exhibition of simulation specs which tries to replicate the practical difficulties of living with severe sight loss depending on different ophthalmic conditions.  Regrettably very few staff were interested in taking part (we arranged this for lunchtime).  Most members of the public are very indifferent to visual or hearing impairment, UNLESS it affects them.

    The work I undertake is very visual in nature with reading vast quantities of notes.  The training tends to be printed forms to show you how to complete a task with computer screenshots (in tiny print). Staff who should be training are very reluctant to actually sit with you (I have a large monitor so that I can actually do my job).  Basically either you work to the requirements of the employer, or you are faced with the unpleasant bureaucratic minefield of the benefits system.

    It would really help if more disabled people (particularly with sensory impairments) were in senior managerial roles which would boost recruitment....but not hopeful this will happen in my working lifetime.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    CaroA · 8 days ago
    With love from Chat GBT... Bless it it has more morality and humanity in it than these old testament politicians....


    'The Calvinist work ethic, also known as the Protestant work ethic, stems from the teachings of John Calvin. It emphasizes hard work, discipline, and frugality as moral virtues, suggesting that success and worldly achievements are signs of God's favor and salvation. This belief has deeply influenced Western society, often tying a person’s moral worth to their ability to work and succeed. Today, this mindset still affects attitudes toward disability benefits, reinforcing harmful ideas that equate worthiness with productivity, rather than recognizing the inherent value of all individuals'



  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Labour Out · 8 days 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 · 8 days 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.
      A · 4 days ago
      @Labour Out When the majority feel like this, it wouldn't happen. But if the majority are against something such as, being forced onto some voucher scheme they will wave it through with nothing to see here attitude . We had to make tough choices. Their nothing more than Blue in Red. What their proposing, shouldn't even be discussed. In one of the supposedly richest countries in the world, that being only 1% in it are. One little thing which will be obvious to most they have gloriously overlooked is making people wait for months agonising as to how their cope financially with these lunatic ideas in regard to a voucher scheme. Still, we live in a democracy...right! If they want to do everyone a favour, then, go after the fraudster's.  But no, just whack everyone in big swoop no matter what the financial or health implications this will cause. 

      I am sure why they play the game of, 'wait and see' . This will have had a very detrimental effect on people's mental health. And yet, they feel they have some magic wand called 'WORK' to fix that. Will never vote for these again...ever!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon · 9 days 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 · 9 days 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 days ago
      @naheegan Yes, i am now paranoid of paying in my 1p and 2p's accumulated over a month in case it prompts a massive DWP investigation.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      MrFibro · 8 days ago
      @A Best of it, they hack the other side of the globe into your uk bank account.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      naheegan · 8 days ago
      @lesley-anne Thank you lesley. I was taken aback because it had never happened before and it was a common withdrawal for me.

      That's not useful to only have one atm in your town, and it having been targeted in the past by fraudsters. Have you watched any youtube videos that show how to spot a messed-with atm? 

      Good that you have a Post Office, it being a secure place for transactions. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      naheegan · 8 days ago
      @A Thanks for that information. 
      Your story raised a giggle. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      A · 8 days 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.
    Pete · 9 days 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.
      Labour Out · 8 days ago
      @Pete Starmer is worth about 7 million. So he wasn't able to provide somewhere himself for his son to study for his GCSEs.

      Imagine his son was in over crowded accommodation studying for his GCSEs

      Imagine his son was in a home that couldn't be heated studying for his GCSEs

      Imagine his son was hungry in a home that is relying on foodbanks studying for his GCSEs

      That's the situation for millions of people on this country 

      Yet he's cutting welfare and OAPs while doing a U turn on 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Termagant · 9 days 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.
      PP · 8 days ago
      @The Termagant I am so sorry to hear this, I am also in a similar situation as you, and also on my own, so understand what you're going through, and I don't have any family or friends who can support me. I am so worried if they bring out the vouchers for PIP, and the difficulties I'll have in using these, I'm feeling sick everytime in my stomach when thinking about this and really struggling to cope with my daily routine with all this going on.

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.