| Speech
in Westminster Hall debate, 16 May 2007
Tax
Credits
John
Barrett (Edinburgh, West) (LD): This is not the first
time that I have had to initiate a debate on the problems
with the tax credits system on behalf of my constituents.
I would love to believe that today is the last time that
I will be required to do so. On the previous occasion,
I was very grateful to the Paymaster General for the speedy
resolution of the cases that I raised. I hope for a similarly
positive response today. I would also like to send her
my best wishes for a speedy recovery.
When I last had the opportunity to
speak in the House on the issue, I and other hon. Members
raised a number of key concerns: the unfair way in which
Her Majesty’s Revenue
and Customs is attempting to claw back funds; the complexity
of the system; the fragile and failing IT system; and fears
that the tax credit office is acting improperly in some cases
in its attempts to reclaim overpayments. I cannot help but
feel a sense of déjà vu today, as in many areas
the problems remain.
Last week was a week of change in
British politics, with the Prime Minister announcing that
he was stepping down and the Blair era drawing to a close.
However, last week’s
report on tax credits from the Public Accounts Committee
showed that some things in British politics never seem to
change. The tax credits system remains in disarray. It is
still failing to help properly many of the families whom
it was set up to help.
Perhaps most worrying of all is the
nagging feeling that, despite all the damning reports and
newspaper headlines, the Government have still not fully
accepted the scale of the problem. I am not alone in saying
that the Government, crucially, are dragging their heels
over essential reforms. Hardly a week goes by without constituents
of mine turning up to advice surgeries having experienced
problems with tax credits. I am sure that most hon. Members
here today could say the same. However, for every constituent
who contacts their MP, asking them to take up a case, there
are many more who in effect decide to suffer in silence.
Today’s
debate should not be just for our current casework issues;
it must also be for our constituents who have had problems
with tax credits, but have decided to accept the failings
of the system when their overpayments have been clawed back—they
have decided simply to pay up.
I hope that the Minister will not attempt to pretend that
I or others are blowing problems out of proportion. The scale
of the problem is considerable, and real people are paying
the price. One clear example of that is the number of people
who do not want to claim tax credits for fear of discovering
at a later date that money that they have spent must be repaid.
I cannot estimate their number. If the Minister can, I hope
that he will share it with us today.
The other number that I cannot give is the number of claimants
who are spending their tax credits today in the belief that
it is their money, but who will find out in the future that
they should not have been given it and they are expected
to repay it, even when they supplied all the information
asked for, and in proper time. I will come later to the possible
scale of the problem.
I will not be so churlish today as to suggest that the tax
credits system has not helped people; of course it has.
However, I hope that the Minister in his reply will accept
that it has made life a misery for too many families and
that the Government must take responsibility for the failings
that have still not been dealt with.
The figures will be all too familiar
to most hon. Members, but it is worth reminding ourselves
of the scale of the problems facing the system. As last
week’s Public Accounts Committee
report outlined, overpayments totalled about £5.8 billion
over the first three years—a staggering total. The
Department has attempted to recoup some of those overpayments,
but has not always been able to do so. As a result, more
than £500 million has so far been written off, and
it is estimated that in excess of another £1 billion-worth
of debt might be impossible to recover.
In my own city of Edinburgh, the
most recent figures for overpayments show that 11,200 of
34,000 tax credit awards were overpaid—about one third of all awards. Figures
from 2004-05 show that a total of £9.5 million is due
to be repaid by Edinburgh recipients whose tax credit awards
have been overpaid. That will result in an average due repayment
across the city of about £850—enough to throw
the budgets of most families out of the window.
I could give numerous examples of
individuals who have contacted me since 2003, but today
I will give just one or two, because they capture what
is at the heart of the problem. Deborah Karimi, a 48-year-old
mother of two who lives at 72 Muirhouse green in my constituency,
is one example of a person who works hard—she is employed in a Sainsbury’s supermarket—but
who has been through such a bad experience that when advised
recently that she might qualify for other benefits, she said
that she would not apply for them after her experience with
tax credits.
Mrs. Karimi was earning about £10,000 a year when
she was granted a rent rebate from her local authority. She
had supplied her three most recent wage slips to the authority
and was advised by it that she might qualify for tax credits.
Her most recent P60 at the time was only about one month
old. It was just after the end of the tax year and the document
showed her earnings at about £10,000, yet she was asked
for the details of her previous P60, for the previous year,
when she worked part-time and her earnings were between £6,000
and £7,000. She repeatedly offered details of her current
pay, but was told that that was not how the system worked.
She was told that her award would be calculated using the
old P60. Some four months later, she would be asked for details
of her current P60, showing that she was earning £10,000
a year.
At the same time, Mrs. Karimi received
correspondence from the tax credit office saying that the
payments would stop, and more correspondence confirming
that the payments would continue. She was receiving £115.28 a month, which
was thankfully received and spent every month. She was a
low earner in full-time employment—exactly the kind
of person who needed help to stay in work, rather than living
on benefits. She was earning about £11,000 a year and
was told that her overpayment total was £1,280.47,
based on the fact that her income
was too high to qualify. That is the income on the P60 that
Mrs. Karimi offered to supply in the first instance, but
which was refused. One has to ask just exactly how she could
have been more helpful. She is an honest individual.
Jo Swinson (East Dunbartonshire)
(LD): I sympathise with my hon. Friend’s constituent. I wonder what his view
is of the case of one of my constituents, who was told that
they had been overpaid to the tune of £5,300 and that
that had to be repaid within one year. Surely by definition
families who are in receipt of tax credits cannot find the
money required to repay sums of £400-plus a month.
That causes huge stress and in some cases makes people ill
with worry. The system is so complicated and is letting people
down.
John Barrett: The case that my hon. Friend raises is, sadly,
all too typical. Some people have not only spent the money;
they may also have taken on hire purchase agreements, based
on the estimated new income. They cannot live on the basic
income, which is obviously low in order for them to qualify
for tax credits. They have then spent that money and taken
on further debts. They have the worst of both worlds. It
is perfectly reasonable to accept, as is in the rules, that
if hardship will be caused, in some cases these debts must
be written off.
Mrs. Karimi is an honest individual
who is working hard to this day. She is repaying her debts
by working every alternate weekend and she is currently
paying off an outstanding council tax debt at £50 a month. That is no mean feat on earnings
of about £11,000 a year, but as she has told me, “You
can’t get blood out of a stone” and the threat
to take her to court for the money will result in legal fees
for lawyers and nothing much else. If ever there was a case
of a debt causing hardship and needing to be written off,
that case and the case raised by my hon. Friend the Member
for East Dunbartonshire (Jo Swinson) are two examples.
Mrs. Karimi had gone to the tax credit office with the correct
up-to-date information and was told that no, she needed to
provide out-of-date information, which both she and the tax
credit office knew would result in overpayments. Yet because
that is the way in which the system operates, she is told
that that is the way it has to be. It is surely a recipe
for disaster.
Just yesterday, I was contacted by Citizens Advice, which
is increasingly concerned about the rising number of cases
in which citizens advice bureaux are having to advise clients
about overpayments when the clients have no idea why they
have been overpaid and find it difficult to obtain explanations.
In many cases, even the amount owed is unclear. At the same
time, in the past few months the number of clients who have
been threatened with legal action for recovery of overpayments,
even in those circumstances, has increased.
The Minister might be interested to know that Citizens Advice
is conducting an online survey asking the public to report
their experiences of the tax credit system. So far, 80 per
cent. of respondents have reported being overpaid, most of
whom did not find it easy to understand why.
Mr. Mark Francois
(Rayleigh) (Con):
I am listening carefully to the detailed case that the
hon. Gentleman is making. Does he accept that one of the
system’s great
weaknesses is that when people receive a notification telling
them that they have been overpaid, there is usually no breakdown
of the relevant calculations? Those people are then suddenly
required to pay back the money, which is sometimes quite
a large sum, without even knowing how the debt was arrived
at.
John Barrett: It must be very simple
to supply people for whom an overpayment has been calculated
with details about payments. One of the tests as to whether
overpayments should be paid back is whether the individual
could reasonably have worked out the correct amount. I
would say that it is reasonable for an applicant to presume
that the Government’s calculations
are correct, and that it is unreasonable to expect a low
earner who receives tax credits to assume that the Government
have made a miscalculation. If details about payments were
supplied, more people would know right away what the calculations
were, and the problem would be solved. While overpayments
remain so common, there is an urgent need for an improvement
in the way in which overpayments are explained, as the hon.
Gentleman suggests.
Citizens Advice is calling for a 30-day delay before the
recovery of the overpaid amount starts. I entirely agree.
If constituents of mine have been open and honest in their
dealings with the tax credit office, but internal mistakes
have led to an overpayment, it is simply unacceptable to
demand large amounts of money back from those people, who
reasonably assumed that the Government got their sums right.
It is nothing short of outrageous that decent, honest, hard-working
people are being forced into financial hardship as a direct
result of incompetence in the system.
Several of my constituents who have had their fingers burnt
by the tax credit system tell me that they will not bother
to apply for tax credits again, not because they do not need
the extra help, but because they cannot cope with another
round of wrangling with the tax credit office about entirely
avoidable overpayments. Evidence from Citizens Advice shows
that more and more eligible families who have had problems
are now reluctant to claim what they are entitled to. Some
2 million people who are eligible for tax credits do not
claim them. I wonder how many of them have simply decided
that the short-term benefits are not worth the headaches
in the long-term.
I could list more examples of overpayments,
but it is more important to discuss what the Government
are doing to get to grips with the problems, and whether
they have been effective. The most important change that
Ministers have made to reduce overpayments has been to
raise from £2,500 to £25,000
the threshold for in-year income increases that are ignored
when awards are finalised. The Government contend that that
change will eventually reduce overpayments by a third. However,
a recurring complaint is that there is not enough data about
the problems in the system to be able to say definitively
what difference such a measure will make. Either way, the
move does nothing to address the failure and unfairness at
the heart of the system. What is needed is a fundamental
rethink of the benefits system and a move towards a fairer
system of fixed awards and clearer notices. I am sure that
my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch
and Strathspey (Danny Alexander) will go into that in detail
when he sums up on behalf of the Liberal Democrats.
The general problem with the complexity
of the system is at the root of many of its woes. Nowhere
is that more obvious than in the Department’s struggle with error and fraud.
Tax credits suffer from the biggest error and fraud rates
in Government, but, crucially, there are neither routine
estimates of fraud and error nor targets set for reducing
them. In 2003-04, between £1.06 billion and £1.28
billion—almost 10 per cent. by value—was incorrectly
paid to claimants.
I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response
to the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee that
targets and estimates should be introduced urgently. This
issue highlights the recurring difficulty of establishing
the true scale of the problems in the system and how effectively
they are being tackled, because we simply do not have access
to sufficient information to make those judgments. We desperately
need earlier estimates of overall levels of error and fraud
to use as benchmarks to assess the effectiveness of action
to combat those problems. As was outlined in the Committee’s
report last week, the e-portal system was deficient from
the outset and was entirely unsuited to the inevitable onslaught
from organised criminals. The entire system was unable, by
its very design, to give proper protection against error
and fraud.
Many of my constituents feel that the Government have placed
greater priority on trying to chase and claw back money from
hard-working families who have been unwittingly overpaid
instead of rolling up their sleeves and dealing with the
internal problems that have allowed such high levels of fraud
and error to occur. The Chancellor is searching around for
new ideas for his first 100 days in No. 10, but I suggest
that he should concentrate first on sorting out the mess
in the tax credit system. The Government seem to be perpetually
in denial about the scale of the problem, but the ongoing
difficulties can no longer be passed off as teething problems
that are common to any new administrative system. They are
deep-rooted difficulties at the heart of the system.
The first steps to solving the overall
problem are to accept its seriousness and scale and to
get to grips with the problems and their causes. The recent
parliamentary ombudsman’s
report, “Tax credits: putting things right”,
made 12 key recommendations that were widely supported by
families and Parliament alike. Many months on, however, I
believe that only four of those recommendations have been
implemented. If the situation has changed substantially,
I would welcome some clarification from the Minister. If
the other eight recommendations still have not been accepted,
I should like to know why. Why have so many of the ombudsman’s
recommendations been ignored? Why are 2 million eligible
people now deciding that applying for tax credits is not
worth the risk? Why are hard-working families being made
to pay for mistakes that they have not made? I look forward
to hearing the Minister’s replies.
|