Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Welfare Fraud: Serious and Organised Crime

Monday 17 March 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 0 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Markus Campbell-Savours asked about the new powers in the fraud Bill and the rise in pension credit fraud.
  • The Minister noted that the eligibility verification measure in the Bill will help identify fraud related to pension credit, universal credit, and employment and support allowance.
  • The data feed provided by the measure will flag up claimants involved in capital fraud and those staying out of the country longer than required.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Markus Campbell-Savours Lab Penrith and Solway
Context

The question addresses the increasing issue of benefit fraud, particularly pension credit fraud, which has seen a significant rise in recent years. The MP notes that capital fraud and prolonged stays abroad account for 50% of all pension credit fraud.

Question

I welcome the new powers in the fraud Bill, and note the huge increase in pension credit fraud in recent years. Can the Minister explain how capital fraud and fraud in which recipients stay out of the country for longer than the rules require, which together account for 50% of all pension credit fraud, will be targeted under the new rules?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Andrew Western)

My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. The eligibility verification measure in the new Bill will do just that, providing a crucial data feed to help us identify fraud that relates to pension credit as well as to universal credit and employment and support allowance. This will flag up claimants who are potentially in breach of eligibility under capital and abroad criteria, so that we can start to lower the unacceptable level of fraud and protect the public purse.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)