Support 100 years of independent journalism.

  1. Politics
  2. /
17 October 2010updated 27 Sep 2015 2:11am

Osborne: welfare cheats are “mugging“ taxpayers

Measures to tackle benefit fraud are outlined ahead of spending review

By Sophie Elmhirst

David Cameron, his deputy Nick Clegg and Chancellor George Osborne are (according to Andrew Marr) holed up at the Prime Minister’s residence Chequers “putting the final touches” to the spending review this weekend. The full review will be announced on Wednesday this week. Details are inevitably emerging into the press in advance, and today measures for tackling benefit fraud have been revealed.

In an interview with the News of the World (paywall) today, Chancellor George Osborne described benefit cheats as being like “muggers” who robbed taxpayers of billions pounds a year. He said:

“This is a fight. We are really going to go after the welfare cheats. Frankly, a welfare cheat is no different from someone who comes up and robs you in the street. It’s your money. You’re leaving the house at seven in the morning or whatever to go to work and paying your taxes – and then the person down the street is defrauding the welfare system. This money is paid through our taxes which is meant to be going to the most vulnerable in our society, not into the pockets of criminals.”

Alongside his pugnacious accusations, the Department of Work and Pensions has said that hi-tech detection techniques and mobile “hit squads” will be introduced in order to seek out and punish offenders. Osborne’s aggressive rhetoric (and his decision to place an interview with the NOTW) clearly indicates an appeal to certain constituencies (the Daily Mail and Daily Express have rewarded him with headlines such as: “Three strikes and you are off benefits“). The Chancellor will be keen to get people onside before the cuts are announced on Wednesday – cuts that will deeply affect many natural Tory voters’ lives.

Sign up for The New Statesman’s newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. The New Statesman’s global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. Our weekly culture newsletter – from books and art to pop culture and memes – sent every Friday. A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. A weekly dig into the New Statesman’s archive of over 100 years of stellar and influential journalism, sent each Wednesday. Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.
I consent to New Statesman Media Group collecting my details provided via this form in accordance with the Privacy Policy

Speaking on the Andrew Marr Show this morning, Osborne talked about his “very tough” welfare proposals – including fines for one-off benefit errors, and the threat of losing benefits for three years for repeatedly false claims. He also defended the government’s “sensible” economic plans, saying it was the only way to restore “economic credibility”. But Osborne struggled to defend the fundamental inconsistency in his child benefit policy which would see double-income families still receiving the benefit, while single-income families (earning less) would not.

Osborne said: “What I’ve sought to do is provide a simple system that doesn’t abolish child benefit… but does remove it from high-rate taxpayers.” When challenged on the inherent unfairness, Osborne repeated the fact that he wanted the system to be simple, but offered no alternative to his proposals that will see single earners losing out. For the voters who support him on tackling benefit fraud, this major flaw in his policy will not be so easily dismissed. Osborne will be fighting to defend his child benefit plan for some time to come.