§ Harry CohenTo ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many individuals' personal data have been processed in data matching exercises in connection with benefit fraud; how many cases were identified as part of that data matching exercise as being possible cases of benefit fraud requiring further investigation; how many cases after investigation were deemed likely to be fraudulent; how many cases were prosecuted; what the total costs were of all data matching exercises, including staff and computer costs; and what the estimated total savings to the public purse are and the multiplier used in this calculation. [59210]
§ Malcolm WicksData-matching is a powerful tool in the detection of fraud and incorrectness in the benefit system. The Department's Matching Intelligence Data Analysis Service (MIDAS) operates the Generalised Matching Service (GMS) for benefits administered by the Department, and the Housing Benefit Matching Service (HBMS) for housing benefit and council tax benefit which are administered by local authorities.
The data-matching process involves data extracts being taken from the Department's main benefit computer systems and local authority benefit systems which are matched against each other using data matching "rules" to identify discrepancies between the data sets. Such discrepancies are then referred for local investigation. Legislation also provides for personal data held by other Government Departments to be matched against departmental and local authority data to identify discrepancies.
It is not possible to say how many individuals' personal data have been processed in data-matching exercises because each individual's details may be held on several systems at the same time.
Information on the overall cost of conducting data-matching exercises and investigating discrepancies is not available.
The available information on the results from GMS and HBMS data-matching operations is in the tables.
1037W
Housing Benefit Matching Service5 Up to 1998 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 Referrals issued 25,940 49.084 65,143 86,006 78,144 Positive results1 2— 2— 2— 29,037 32,243 Successful prosecutions 2— 75 208 392 319 Total overpayments3 (£ million) 3.4 10.6 18.6 37.2 36.8 Weekly benefit savings × 32 weeks (£ million) 4.3 12.9 17.8 22.2 21.8 1Cases where, following investigation, there was an increase or decrease in the rate of benefit because of fraud, customer error or official error.
2Information is not available.
3Arising from fraud, customer error or official error.
4Monetary Value Adjustment (MVA) is the difference between the weekly amount of benefit that would have been paid, or would have continued to be paid, and the benefit paid following the decision-maker's decision on the information gathered. MVA was introduced during the 1999–2000 financial year. Prior to the GMS recorded a Weekly Benefit Savings (WBS) figure that used a multiplier of 32 weeks. This method of recording savings was used by HBMS until 31 March 2002, after which it began to use MVA. Separate GMS figures for WBS and overpayments prior to 1999–2000 are not available.
5HBMS does not record sanctions information.
Source:
Matching Intelligence Detection Analysis Services management information.