logo
DWP shares update on powers to check benefit claimant's bank accounts

DWP shares update on powers to check benefit claimant's bank accounts

Wales Online10-05-2025
DWP shares update on powers to check benefit claimant's bank accounts
New legislation would allow the DWP to monitor the bank accounts of people claiming benefits and it's already passed in one of the final hurdles to becoming law
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has provided an update on its intention to scrutinise the bank accounts of benefits claimants. The Labour Party's Fraud, Error and Debt Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and is expected to be enacted later this year. The bill will grant the DWP new, far-reaching powers to tackle fraud within the social security system.
One of these new and contentious powers will allow the DWP to examine the bank accounts of those suspected of having more funds than they declare and to recoup benefit debts. Another provision would enable the department to suspend driving licences.

Both proposals were approved at the third reading of the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill on Tuesday, April 29, bringing the government a step closer to officially introducing these measures.

Under the proposed legislation, banks and other financial institutions will be required to cooperate with government requests to share data to detect benefit fraud. However, the government has assured that the DWP will not have direct access to individuals' bank accounts and will not disclose their personal information to third parties, reports the Mirror.
The bill has now reached the House of Lords and has undergone its first reading. The second reading is scheduled for May 15.
However, there is some discord within the Labour Party regarding these measures, with several members voting for amendments aimed at restricting the DWP's ability to inspect accounts.
Article continues below
The Liberal Democrats have warned that the Bill could result in "Orwellian levels of mass surveillance of those who have means-tested benefits." For money-saving tips, sign up to our Money newsletter here .
In the Commons during the third reading, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall remarked: "Delivering our plan for change means ensuring every single pound of taxpayers' money is wisely spent and goes to those in genuine need.
"That is what this legislation will help deliver, with the biggest ever crackdown on fraud against the public purse."

Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan, in a parliamentary debate, advocated for his amendment which would restrict the government's power to scrutinise a claimant's financial records.
His amendment stipulated that the government should only probe the accounts of individuals it "has reasonable grounds to suspect has committed, is committing or intends to commit" an offence. Addressing fellow MPs, he expressed: "The Bill rightly seeks to tackle organised crime and online fraud, but also worryingly ushers in dangerous new powers compelling banks to trawl through financial information."
He continued: "It is the very poorest in our society which are going to be affected most by this legislation. So banks will be able to trawl for financial information even where there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. That's the key point in this debate."

Labour's Work and Pensions Minister Andrew Western has contested arguments regarding an amendment, insisting it would sabotage the new authority designed to authenticate individuals' benefit eligibility.
He said: "We do require this power because it will enable better data sharing between the private and public sector to help check claimants are meeting the criteria for their benefits and to detect incorrect payments at an earlier stage before any suspicion of wrongdoing has arisen."
Adding clarity, he continued: "It is not a power to be used to respond to suspected fraud. Information will not be shared with the DWP under the assumption that a claimant is guilty of any wrongdoing. The DWP must look into why the account has been flagged by the bank and ascertain whether an incorrect payment has been made."
Article continues below
He emphasised the DWP's commitment to further investigations to confirm whether benefits had been wrongly distributed, pointing to fraud or error as possible causes. Despite support from 10 Labour MPs for Duncan-Jordan's amendment, it was ultimately defeated in a vote—with a sizeable majority of 153, where 238 members voted against and only 85 supported it.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Which three Labour MPs have been suspended and why?
Which three Labour MPs have been suspended and why?

Metro

time20 minutes ago

  • Metro

Which three Labour MPs have been suspended and why?

The Prime Minister has suspended three MPs from the Labour Party. The move comes after a vote in Parliament over the planned – and controversial – welfare reforms earlier this month. Sir Keir's welfare bill passed by 335 votes to 260 after last-minute changes to the proposal to have it approved after uproar over the plans to cut Universal Credit and Pip payments. Despite the changes, some MPs rebelled in the final vote, and they have now been suspended. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Craig Munro breaks down Westminster chaos into easy to follow insight, walking you through what the latest policies mean to you. Sent every Wednesday. Sign up here. The Labour leader has reportedly suspended three first-year MPs – Neil Duncan-Jordan, Brian Leishman and Chris Hinchliff. Mr Duncan-Jordan and Ms Leishman confirmed the suspension. Mr Hinchliff's suspension was first reported by The Times. The suspension means the trio have 'lost the whip' after they voted against the government's planned welfare reforms on July 1. MPs who belong to a party are expected to vote in Parliament as the party leadership desires. The MPs are now expelled from the Labour Party as disciplinary action. However, expelled politicians can continue as MPs, but they no longer have to follow the party line during voting. Mr Duncan-Jordan, an MP for Poole, said after the news emerged: 'Since being elected, I have consistently spoken up for my constituents on a range of issues, including most recently on cuts to disability benefits. 'I understood this could come at a cost, but I couldn't support making disabled people poorer. More Trending 'Although I've been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party today, I've been part of the Labour and trade union movement for 40 years and remain as committed as ever to its values.' Meanwhile, Mr Leishman, who represents Alloa and Grangemouth, said: 'I wish to remain a Labour MP and deliver the positive change many voters are craving. 'I have voted against the Government on issues because I want to effectively represent and be the voice for communities across Alloa and Grangemouth. 'I firmly believe that it is not my duty as an MP to make people poorer, especially those that have suffered because of austerity and its dire consequences.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: How to save 'broken' Britain? Readers discuss patriotic millionaires and propose plutocracy MORE: Here's what to expect from Donald Trump's second UK state visit in September MORE: Three in five Brits 'wouldn't even trust Starmer or Farage to watch their bag'

Starmer suspends rebellious MPs
Starmer suspends rebellious MPs

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Starmer suspends rebellious MPs

Sir Keir Starmer has carried out a purge of troublesome backbenchers as he suspended a number of MPs. Neil Duncan- Jordan and Brian Leishman have confirmed their suspensions from the parliamentary party, while The Times has reported that Chris Hinchliff has also lost the whip. All three voted against the Government's planned welfare reforms as part of a wider rebellion earlier this month, and all were first elected at last year's election. Mr Duncan-Jordan has said he remains 'as committed as ever' to Labour values, but accepted that voting against the welfare plans 'could come at a cost'. In a statement, the MP for Poole said: 'Since being elected, I have consistently spoken up for my constituents on a range of issues, including most recently on cuts to disability benefits. 'I understood this could come at a cost, but I couldn't support making disabled people poorer. 'Although I've been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party today, I've been part of the Labour and trade union movement for 40 years and remain as committed as ever to its values.' Meanwhile, while Mr Leishman said he is a 'proud Labour member' and remains 'committed to the party' The office of the MP for Alloa and Grangemouth confirmed he had had the whip 'temporarily suspended'. 'I wish to remain a Labour MP and deliver the positive change many voters are craving,' Mr Leishman said in a statement. 'I have voted against the Government on issues because I want to effectively represent and be the voice for communities across Alloa and Grangemouth. 'I firmly believe that it is not my duty as an MP to make people poorer, especially those that have suffered because of austerity and its dire consequences.'

Has Starmer finally developed a backbone?
Has Starmer finally developed a backbone?

Telegraph

time21 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Has Starmer finally developed a backbone?

Keir Starmer has just presented two obstinate fingers to his erstwhile friend and leader, Jeremy Corbyn. The current political narrative adopted by some critics of the Prime Minister is that he is a man in retreat, beleaguered on all flanks by failing policy initiatives, a rebellious party and a new Left-wing rival set to drain even more support away from the Government. In a stroke, by removing at least four (there may be more to come) rebellious MPs from the Labour whip, Starmer has just shown his determination to deal with all three problems at once. A leader who truly felt in a weak position would have found an excuse to delay taking any disciplinary action against those Labour MPs who organised the sizeable rebellion that forced ministers to surrender on the main provisions of the benefits reform Bill two weeks ago. The eventual capitulation was humiliating for Starmer and provided the worst 48 hours for the Government it has endured in a very uncomfortable year in office. Then, with the (perhaps premature) announcement by Zarah Sultana that she would be co-leading with Corbyn a new Left-wing party that would provide an alternative to discontented voters, Starmer looked even more on the defensive. But today, with the unexpected announcement that he has withdrawn the whip from the ringleaders of the welfare reform rebellion, the Prime Minister is back on the front foot. The message he is sending out is far more important than the mere fact that four relatively unknown back benchers – Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth), Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole), Chris Hinchcliff (North East Hertfordshire) and Rachael Maskell (York Central) – will now not be guaranteed the right to stand for re-election as Labour candidates when the next general election arrives. Basically, Starmer is saying to his suspended colleagues and to Corbyn's new enterprise: fill your boots. See if I care. He will recognise that all four suspended MPs might want to take their chances with Corbyn. But whether they do or not won't affect Labour's majority in any serious way. And they will come under pressure from their own local parties to stay and fight to get the whip back. Whatever they choose to do, Starmer has made it clear he will only have them back on his terms, as MPs willing to support this Government's agenda. If they want to leave, they're welcome to do so, but membership of the Parliamentary Labour Party comes with obligations that the leader expects will be fulfilled. It also suggests Starmer doesn't believe that Corbyn's new party, when it's launched, will have the attraction that its founders believe it will. Whether he's right or wrong in that, he is certainly right to give the impression that he is supremely confident of winning out. Meanwhile, the message to other potential rebels or anyone who might be considering taking a principled position on future legislation is: make sure you know what you're getting into. Because your actions might well get you out of the Labour Party for good. Is that what you want? For most, the answer will be a definite no.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store