Gov Access to Bank Accounts for those in receipt of SP

LHW99

The data issue for me is that the wider the number of organisations able to access my data, the more space there is for hackers to penetrate the system and highjack that information. I think of Capita (payroll information), British Library (passport copies), Greater Manchester police / Metropolitan police (officer / staff data), Barts NHS and the Guardian, to name a few I have heard of.

Government data systems are not necessarily top quality, and if they start scraping yet more data from everyone without good reason, the potential level of stolen information could rise exponentially.

zagfles

Qyburn said:

zagfles said:

Qyburn said:

So why was the power included, in your opinion? Why will the Government need access to my bank account, solely because I start receiving the State Pension?

I've already mentioned a couple. See above.

You said it was needed to cover those living abroad, although you don't explain why access would be needed in those cases. I can't see where you gave any other reason. But then you contradict yourself by saying it's just been included by default as they couldn't be arsed to exclude the SP - ie no reason.

No, I speculated that might be a reason. As those living abroad may not be entitled to indexation of the SP depending on which country. The other one was if someone has a side job they're not paying tax on, it's not totally related to the SP other than the SP may use up their PA. 

I'm not contradicting anything, I'm speculating as to reasons, giving possibilites, not stating "this is the reason"! However I think hugheskevi's post on page 7 is the the most likely explaination.

zagfles

Sea_Shell said:

Means testing aside...

Are you HAPPY that the government will have additional powers to look into your personal banking without needing any suspicion or "cause"?

Should your banking (income and expenditure) be PRIVATE, if you are just an ordinary pensioner, living within the rules?

Personally I'm not bothered, I know people who work with HMRC data and they have very strict confidentiality rules. The question I'd ask is what interest would the govt have in my banking, and what harm would it do me if officials bound by confidentiality rules can see what I spent money on. Bank staff will have access to my accounts so it's not like it's totally private to me anyway.

But it's a totally separate issue to whether this has anything to do with means testing the SP.

We can all come up with "tin foil hat" or "thin end of the wedge" reasons as to WHY the Gov feel the need to put this in place...but the question is more about putting in place the means to do so, if they choose.

If it is a party political move (to scaremonger), its and odd one, as one has to ask themselves, which party would be more likely to means test the SP for the "rich"?   

In my view it's highly unlikely any party would means test the SP at a low level. It would be political and economic suicide. 

I think there's a small possibility of means testing at a high level (similar to the HICBC), and I would give Labour the edge on doing that possibily justifying it as an alternative to reinstating the LTA, but even that I think is unlikely.

But someone said earlier that those on the right have a desire to means test the SP. "No, it's not a long stretch to imagine it would enable means-testing - that has long been an aim of certain sections of the political right, they just wouldn't dare say it out loud in one go."

And the tweet in the OP is a Labour MP talking about the actions of Tory ministers and stating they would be "useful would be to means test the State Pension". 

zagfles

Thumbs_Up said:

Pollycat said:

Pat38493 said:

Sea_Shell said:

Means testing aside...

Are you HAPPY that the government will have additional powers to look into your personal banking without needing any suspicion or "cause"?

Should your banking (income and expenditure) be PRIVATE, if you are just an ordinary pensioner, living within the rules?

We can all come up with "tin foil hat" or "thin end of the wedge" reasons as to WHY the Gov feel the need to put this in place...but the question is more about putting in place the means to do so, if they choose.


If it is a party political move (to scaremonger), its and odd one, as one has to ask themselves, which party would be more likely to means test the SP for the "rich"?   

err..... speaking for me, no I'm not, if it's as portrayed in this thread i.e. this is a kind of new precedent where the government gives themselves vaguely defined powers to poke about in my bank account - I don't want to be having to answer questions from HMRC or other government agencies about how I am organizing my personal finances unless they have launched a proper investigation into my affairs with due cause to look into it.

The principle this would seem to breach is that the government should not be able to access my bank account without some kind of prior suspicion or due cause.

Me neither.
I'm in receipt of the state pension.
I'm almost certainly never going to qualify for any means tested benefits.
So why should anyone be able - or feel it necessary - to check my personal bank account?

Maybe to tick a box exercise to escape profiling complaints. For e.g. for what reason would immigration control stop a little old lady dressed as a nun passing through Heathrow arrivals lounge.   

Indeed. People often complain that the govt put too much effort into tackling benefit fraud and not enough into tackling tax fraud. 

So take two people, a poor pensioner claiming pension credit, and rich pensioner claiming the state pension, other pensions, maybe foreign income, rental income etc.

So if the first person can have their bank account snooped at to check if they're committing benefit fraud, should the second person have their bank account snooped at to check if they're comitting tax fraud?

DBdoobydoo

flaneurs_lobster said:

DBdoobydoo said:

I live in France & receive a UK state pension. How will the UK government monitor my French bank account?

Avec le Entente Cordiale, l'accès aux comptes bancaires est simple.

Not so. It would require a court order which would need to be justified eg evidence of money laundering,

Steve_666_

zagfles said:

Qyburn said:

zagfles said:

Qyburn said:

So why was the power included, in your opinion? Why will the Government need access to my bank account, solely because I start receiving the State Pension?

I've already mentioned a couple. See above.

You said it was needed to cover those living abroad, although you don't explain why access would be needed in those cases. I can't see where you gave any other reason. But then you contradict yourself by saying it's just been included by default as they couldn't be arsed to exclude the SP - ie no reason.

" The other one was if someone has a side job they're not paying tax on, it's not totally related to the SP other than the SP may use up their PA. "

If its a general sweep to look for tax cheats, then it ought to include all UK adults, not target one group

Pat38493

zagfles said:

Thumbs_Up said:

Pollycat said:

Pat38493 said:

Sea_Shell said:

Means testing aside...

Are you HAPPY that the government will have additional powers to look into your personal banking without needing any suspicion or "cause"?

Should your banking (income and expenditure) be PRIVATE, if you are just an ordinary pensioner, living within the rules?

We can all come up with "tin foil hat" or "thin end of the wedge" reasons as to WHY the Gov feel the need to put this in place...but the question is more about putting in place the means to do so, if they choose.


If it is a party political move (to scaremonger), its and odd one, as one has to ask themselves, which party would be more likely to means test the SP for the "rich"?   

err..... speaking for me, no I'm not, if it's as portrayed in this thread i.e. this is a kind of new precedent where the government gives themselves vaguely defined powers to poke about in my bank account - I don't want to be having to answer questions from HMRC or other government agencies about how I am organizing my personal finances unless they have launched a proper investigation into my affairs with due cause to look into it.

The principle this would seem to breach is that the government should not be able to access my bank account without some kind of prior suspicion or due cause.

Me neither.
I'm in receipt of the state pension.
I'm almost certainly never going to qualify for any means tested benefits.
So why should anyone be able - or feel it necessary - to check my personal bank account?

Maybe to tick a box exercise to escape profiling complaints. For e.g. for what reason would immigration control stop a little old lady dressed as a nun passing through Heathrow arrivals lounge.   

Indeed. People often complain that the govt put too much effort into tackling benefit fraud and not enough into tackling tax fraud. 

So take two people, a poor pensioner claiming pension credit, and rich pensioner claiming the state pension, other pensions, maybe foreign income, rental income etc.

So if the first person can have their bank account snooped at to check if they're committing benefit fraud, should the second person have their bank account snooped at to check if they're comitting tax fraud?

I guess people would have different opinions on this, but my first one would be - in both cases no, unless the relevant authority has some kind of specific information about that individual person that justifies the invasion of privacy.

Even in the case this should be allowed, it should be restricted to specific searches targeted at specific events e.g. is this person receiving funds from specific organizations or accounts, and information from the bank account that is not relevant to the search e.g. that someone purchased a lottery ticket or a coat hanger, should be kept private.

Also I would be very wary of blanket powers where HMRC or anyone else can search your account for one reason, and then start raising concerns about something completely unrelated.  On the assumption that you haven't done anything wrong, why should you have to spend a lot of time and effort to prove to government officials that you are innocent?

Thumbs_Up

I know for sure some members on here would rather stab themselves in the eye with a dinner fork rather then reading an article in the Daily Mail, it seems they have caught on, see here I dare you, just don't read the article in the kitchen.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12831923/OAPs-surveillance-Minister-admits-Government-snoop-bank-accounts-state-pensioners-battle-against-8bn-year-cost-welfare-fraud-despite-Mel-Stride-saying-theres-low-level-swindling-old-age-benefits.html

hugheskevi

Thumbs_Up said:

I know for sure some members on here would rather stab themselves in the eye with a dinner fork rather then reading an article in the Daily Mail, it seems they have caught on, see here I dare you, just don't read the article in the kitchen.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12831923/OAPs-surveillance-Minister-admits-Government-snoop-bank-accounts-state-pensioners-battle-against-8bn-year-cost-welfare-fraud-despite-Mel-Stride-saying-theres-low-level-swindling-old-age-benefits.html

A good article, for the DM. Some useful quotes in particular.

I never find it reassuring when politicians and officials talk of no intent to use powers currently, or (more generally, not relevant in this case) if they make a pledge not to do something that could be done.

Such words bind the existing Parliament, might bind the next Parliament if the same party and Prime Minister are retained, but have no relevance at all otherwise. I recall Gordon Brown announcing at the dispatch box that there was no intent to use CPI for uprating...

zagfles

hugheskevi said:

Thumbs_Up said:

I know for sure some members on here would rather stab themselves in the eye with a dinner fork rather then reading an article in the Daily Mail, it seems they have caught on, see here I dare you, just don't read the article in the kitchen.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12831923/OAPs-surveillance-Minister-admits-Government-snoop-bank-accounts-state-pensioners-battle-against-8bn-year-cost-welfare-fraud-despite-Mel-Stride-saying-theres-low-level-swindling-old-age-benefits.html

A good article, for the DM. Some useful quotes in particular.

I never find it reassuring when politicians and officials talk of no intent to use powers currently, or (more generally, not relevant in this case) if they make a pledge not to do something that could be done.

Such words bind the existing Parliament, might bind the next Parliament if the same party and Prime Minister are retained, but have no relevance at all otherwise. I recall Gordon Brown announcing at the dispatch box that there was no intent to use CPI for uprating...

Or even the same PM/party. I remember him announcing in 1997 he wouldn't let house prices get out of control. Fast forward to 2007, same party, same PM, same chancellor. Biggest ever 10 year real-terms rise in house prices!