Identity Cards (Hansard, 17 November 2003)

§ 2. Mr. James Plaskitt (Warwick and Leamington)
If he will make a statement on his assessment of the possible role of identity cards in combating benefit fraud. [138634]

§ The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith)
As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has made clear, the main case for ID cards is to counter terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration, but it is common sense that they would also be a big help in combating benefit fraud involving false identity.

§ Mr. Plaskitt
I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. We have made useful progress in combating benefit fraud, especially in respect of income support and the jobseeker's allowance, but with millions more national insurance numbers in circulation than there are citizens in the United Kingdom, is it not the case that the more technologically sophisticated proof of identity would help us to make even more progress?

§ Mr. Smith
Indeed it would. We inherited an enormous problem with the number of national insurance numbers—some 71.5 million, well in excess of the adult population. If we subtract the actual adult population of 47 million, the deceased records of 15.5 million and the 7.2 million who have gone abroad, 1.8 million are left. As the House would rightly expect, we are working intensively, sampling the national insurance records to check their authenticity. That work should be completed by the end of the year. I expect to report further progress to the House early next year.

§ Mr. Steve Webb (Northavon)
The 1997 Labour manifesto estimated the cost of housing benefit fraud alone at £2 billion, suggesting that the total cost of benefit fraud runs into many billions of pounds, yet the Department's evidence is that identity fraud accounts for a tiny fraction of that grand total. Indeed, the Home Secretary said last week in the House that social security fraud was not really what he was talking about when he said that he was cutting down on fraud. Will the Secretary of State confirm that when he says that the 469 measure will be "a big help", the marginal effect of ID cards on social security fraud will be acknowledged as peripheral to the debate on the cards?

§ Mr. Smith
Yes, the main fraud that we encounter is not people making false claims of identity, but people making false claims regarding their circumstances. However, that does not mean that cracking down on such fraud will not result in substantial savings. Savings derived from checking multiple claims, verifying national insurance numbers, better recording of immigration and emigration, preventing people who are living together committing fraud, and checking documents add up to about £100 million. It speaks volumes of the way in which Liberal Democrats do their costings that £100 million is neither here nor there to them. That is money that could and should be going to schools and hospitals, not to fraud.

§ Mr. Frank Field (Birkenhead)
As the Secretary of State has, rightly, welcomed ID cards as a potential means of providing a safe entrance into the social security system, may we take it that, when the proposal was discussed in Cabinet, he gave the Home Secretary 100 per cent. support for its introduction?

§ Mr. Smith
As the House knows, we are united in our dedication to combat terrorism, crime and fraud of all kinds. I have strongly supported the good sense in an incremental approach, which demonstrates how an identity document with biometric data would work, initially with driving licences and passports. Once we have established that the technology works and is viable, the House will be able to make a decision on the question of compulsion in future. To my mind, that is a common-sense way to achieve a desirable goal.

§ Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds)
On 13 February, the National Audit Office stated that the rate of reduction of fraud and error in jobseeker's allowance and income support had "slowed" this year. Can the Secretary of State explain that latest departmental failure?

§ Mr. Smith
We remain on track to hit our targets to reduce fraud in income support and JSA. The Conservatives ought to note that when they were in government, they did not even have a target to tackle fraud, whereas since 1998, we have cut fraud in IS and JSA alone by more than a quarter. Of course there is more to do, but we will take no lectures from the Opposition on how to do it.

§ Lawrie Quinn (Scarborough and Whitby)
Given the developing partnership with local government in the fight against benefit fraud, and the increasing mobility of the British population, what discussions has my right hon. Friend had with the Local Government Association and other local government bodies on how the anti-fraud initiative might help them in the front line of dealing with the problem?

§ Mr. Smith
My hon. Friend makes an important point. We are working closely with local authorities. The total number of cases in which action is taken— including prosecution, and the imposition of 470 administrative sanctions and other penalties deployed in combating fraud —is more than double the number in 1997–98. A significant proportion of the increase is accounted for by extra cases and prosecutions brought by local authorities. As well as giving them extra resources, we are keeping in close touch with them on their progress, because the effort has to be a united one involving central Government, local government and all agencies working together to combat an illegal menace that deprives the budget areas that should have priority claim to resources that wrongly go to fraudsters. We have been cracking down jointly with local authorities, and we shall certainly continue to do so.