Unlimited Surveillance

3 days after the 2024 General Election was called, the Digital Protection and Digital Information Bill failed to proceed before the Parliamentary session ended. This article is left online as a reference point for the future.

As the world continues to grapple with the revelations of unscrupulous tax evasion by global billionaires, the UK Government is gearing up to pursue the most vulnerable in society to recover overpaid benefits.

In late 2023, the EU Tax Observatory estimated that a modest 2% levy on the world’s 2,756 wealthiest billionaires could generate a staggering £250bn annually. These billionaires collectively hold an estimated wealth of $13tn.

The report poignantly highlighted the lack of serious efforts to address this issue, warning that the current situation could potentially undermine the public’s faith in existing tax systems.

However, rather than tackling this glaring inequality, the UK government is instead focusing its efforts on the less privileged. It is seeking statutory powers to conduct unlimited surveillance on bank and building society accounts linked to social security benefits and state pensions, even in the absence of any suspicion of fraud.

This move will place millions of individuals, landlords, charities, clubs, voluntary organisations, and companies under round-the-clock scrutiny. No court order will be required, and those under surveillance will not be informed about the data extracted or how it is used or misused. There will be no right to appeal.

This alarming shift towards a surveillance state is being ushered in under the guise of the misleadingly titled Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, currently at report stage in the House of Lords.

The government justifies this infringement on civil liberties as a necessary measure to prevent fraud. It argues that mass surveillance is required to combat benefit fraud, which is estimated to cost around £6.4bn annually, or 2.7% of total benefit payments. The Social Security Fraud Act 2001 currently allows the government to request information from bank accounts on a case-by-case basis if there is reasonable suspicion of fraud. This targeted approach is set to be replaced by indiscriminate mass surveillance of bank accounts.

The surveillance will extend to all bank accounts held by eligible persons. Any individual connected with the monitored account will also be subject to surveillance. This includes landlords receiving direct housing benefit payments, joint account holders, and even friends or family members into whose accounts benefits are paid. Anyone holding power of attorney over a bank account will also be monitored.

The scale of this surveillance is staggering. In 2023, some 22.6m people claimed benefits. The actual number of individuals monitored could be significantly higher, as it will include landlords, joint account holders, SMEs, charities, local clubs, and others. Given that each party under surveillance may hold multiple bank accounts, the number of accounts under surveillance could be astronomical. Banks will be required to sift through millions of transactions to provide the necessary information to the government. Artificial Intelligence will be deployed to scan these millions of transactions in search of irregularities, opening up the potential for significant errors.

These are indeed troubling times, as the state significantly expands its powers to monitor the activities of its citizens.

Comments

Homelessness: A Growing Crisis and the Role of Housing Associations

As homelessness in the United Kingdom continues its relentless rise, reaching over 350,000 , the pressing question remains: why are housing associations (HAs), the wealthiest players in the housing sector, doing so little to stem this tide? With millions of pounds flowing into their coffers annually, housing associations have the financial muscle to make a significant impact. Yet, their contributions to addressing homelessness seem conspicuously limited. HAs have long been a cornerstone of social and affordable housing, managing extensive property portfolios and collecting substantial rental incomes from their tenants. These funds are intended for the maintenance and expansion of housing stock, ensuring that affordable housing remains available to those who need it most. However, a closer examination reveals that the priorities of these associations have shifted over time. The increasing pressure to operate with a business-like efficiency has led housing associations to focus o...

Homing in on the public sector

Published in The Guardian, 8th February 1995

1984 and Truth Social

How Orwell’s masterpiece can predict Trumps next steps I decided, with a grim sort of duty, to re-read Orwell. Pulled my old, dog-eared copy of Nineteen Eighty-Four from the shelf, expecting, perhaps, a historical curiosity. A powerful warning, yes, but one whose specific horrors belonged to the mid-20th century, to Stalin and the nascent Cold War fears that birthed it. Instead, I found myself gripped by a chilling, nauseating sense of déjà vu . Page after page wasn't just resonant; it felt like a dispatch from the present. Not the whole terrifying architecture of Airstrip One, not yet. But the tools, the language, the psychological distortions – they leaped off the page, smeared across the news reports from Donald Trump’s second presidency, barely four months old. It’s uncanny, and frankly, terrifying. Orwell wasn't just writing about totalitarianism; he was dissecting the mechanisms by which truth is dismantled and power becomes absolute. And seeing those mechanisms depl...

How social landlords must respond to Trump tariff impacts

Economic turmoil will have knock-on impacts for affordable housing supply chains in the UK, but it also presents an opportunity for social landlords to demonstrate resilience, argues Peter Brown Trump's tariff barrage, with a 10% baseline tariff on its goods exports to the US includes a 25% tariff on steel and aluminium imports , materials fundamental to the construction industry. Manufacturing and construction supply chains are directly in the firing line and perhaps more importantly, unforeseen turbulence creates uncertain future costs, risks of contract failure and possibly more company insolvencies. This is no longer a distant concern. How should the sector respond? Decisive action is needed. The potential impact of these tariffs, particularly on steel and aluminium, will ripple through our supply chains, inflating construction costs and jeopardising project viability. Housing organisations, from the largest G15 to the smallest community-led associations, must adopt a war-room...

Leadership and Seductive Innovation

Whatever sector, whatever industry you are in, these are challenging times. It is all hands to the pump to find the right course. And for those fearing their very survival, it is understandable that the search for that new, powerful idea should dominate. But success will never lie in new technology alone; it is also critical to look in the right direction, not to get waylaid into seemingly seductive solutions. Look at the business and be honest, are a series of technological innovations likely? And if they are, will they make the impact on your industry that you anticipate? For service organisations in particular, constant technomania is probably an absolute distraction from the core business. Worse, it will beguile you into believing there is a promised land; that there is a magic bullet that will solve the organisation’s problems. The techno-fetishists earn their crust by promoting ever whackier and unachievable ideas. New jobs are being created, innovation labs are springing up. Cha...

Will Housing Investment be Pivotal?

Rachel Reeves’ Spring Statement on 26th March is poised to be a defining moment. We stand at a crossroads, with stark choices before us. The Chancellor must resist the siren song of austerity and instead embrace a bold vision of investment, especially in housing, and safeguard the vital safety net of welfare. The idea that we can achieve economic growth by slashing benefits and public spending is not just misguided, it’s downright dangerous. It’s a cruel delusion to think that we can starve the very people who need support the most and somehow expect the economy to flourish. Cutting wages and benefits for the poor, the old, the sick, and the disabled is not just morally reprehensible, it’s economically illiterate. It will only deepen inequality and stifle any hope of real progress. Instead of these shortsighted cuts, Reeves must prioritise investment in social housing. A decent home is not a luxury; it’s a fundamental human right. Building more social housing will not only provid...

8 facts you need to know about welfare reform

8 facts you need to know about welfare reform This blog is simple. It gives facts that contradict commonly held and repeated views. It debunks the myths that we hear regularly. Print it out and keep it near you. MYTH 1. Keeping the rise in benefits to only 1% is fair because it hits shirkers, not workers. Fact: 60% of the reduction falls on in-work households. Why? Because the 1% rise - which equates to a real-terms cut - affects universal benefits like child benefit and tax credits like child tax credit. MYTH 2. Spending on benefits for those out of work is out of control. Fact: the majority of all welfare spending is on pensioners - 53%. Also, benefits for those out of work is less than a quarter of the total welfare budget. Second, on average, between 2000 and 2010, welfare spending grew annually, in real terms, by only 1.75% - compared to 5.5% in the 1950s and 1960s, and 3% in the 1980s. Third, benefit spending in 2011-12 accounted for 10.4% of GDP, lower than the mid-80s ...

Resurgence of In-Office Mandates Jeopardises Employee Wellbeing

The fading memory of Covid-19 has prompted a concerning trend: employers are increasingly abandoning flexible work arrangements and mandating a full-time return to the office. This shift disregards the demonstrated benefits of balanced, hybrid work models and places employee wellbeing at risk. With a staggering proportion of the workforce reporting burnout, the pervasiveness of workplace stress is not in question—only its magnitude. Mental Health: A Critical Workplace Imperative Mental health challenges are neither novel nor exceptional in the modern professional landscape; they are, however, frequently unacknowledged and inadequately addressed. Driven by demanding expectations, the erosion of work-life boundaries, and relentless performance pressures, numerous employees face significant struggles, often in silence. Mounting pressures have culminated in research indicating that a substantial majority of employees have experienced burnout within the past year. Therefore, it is i...

Climate Change and Housing Inequality: The Vulnerable Bear the Greatest Burden

Climate change affects everyone, but its impacts are far from equal. Across the UK and globally, those living in poor quality housing face the harshest consequences of our changing climate, creating a cruel irony where the people who contributed least to global warming suffer most from its effects. The Heat Island Effect: When Housing Location Becomes Life-Threatening People on low incomes are more likely to live in housing not suited to heat and are twice as likely to live in places that are significantly hotter than neighbouring areas due to the 'urban heat island' effect. This phenomenon means that while affluent neighbourhoods enjoy tree-lined streets and green spaces that naturally cool the air, poorer communities endure concrete jungles that trap and intensify heat. The statistics are stark: around a quarter of the poorest families live in homes that regularly overheat, compared to just one in twenty of the richest households. This isn't simply about comfort—...

Shared Ownership - a housing market fix?

Shared Ownership has given homes to around 180,000 families and it’s claimed that it offers a third way, an opportunity to house many more at a lower cost, another tenure that broadens the landlord offer. Some housing association websites go further and claim “It’s about getting your foot on the housing ladder. It’s a great alternative to renting and perfect if you can’t afford to buy a house outright.” Really? Whilst housing associations like selling them, the experiences of the occupiers can be quite different. Higher entry costs, administrative charges, rents rising annually, plus the responsibility for all repairs can mean the worst of all worlds. Why do increasing numbers feel trapped in the tenure? “It’s a step on the ladder” , yet Cambridge University found ( 2012 ) that over 12 years only 27,908 had staircased to 100%, and in many rural areas freehold ownership is expressly prohibited. They concluded that many shared owners simply cannot afford to buy their property in fu...

Housing: creative solutions

Search This Blog