Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 238: To ask the Minister for Social Protection if she will explain the discrepancy between figures supplied by her to the media for welfare fraud, cited at €483 million for the year 2010, and the figures also supplied by her, and published by the Comptroller and Auditor General in September 2011, citing welfare fraud at €25.9 million for the same year, 2010. [36971/11]

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The prevention of fraud and abuse of the social welfare system is an integral part of the day-to-day work of my Department which processes in excess of 2 million claims each year and makes payments to some 1.4 million people every week at a cost of some €21 billion per annum. However, it is important to recognise that the vast majority of people are receiving the entitlement due to them.

The figure of €483m refers to the Department's control savings in 2010 while the figure of €25.9 million refers to fraud or suspected fraud overpayments in 2010.

Control savings are an estimate of the value of the various control activities across the schemes in payment. These savings represent an estimate of the value of prevented expenditure on fraudulent claims over a future period. Control savings are not actual monies recovered by the Department but are a good indication of the increase in social welfare expenditure that would occur without these activities taking place. These savings arise as a result of control activity on claims in payment, which result in claims being reduced or stopped, and from inspections of employers. These activities also have deterrent or knock-on effects, which are not readily quantifiable in monetary terms. Control savings are used as a performance indicator for year-on-year activities.

Actual monies recovered arise where the Department assesses overpayments in individual cases and subsequently recovers those debts. Where, following a review of a claim in payment, it is confirmed that the customer had been receiving a payment to which they were not entitled, or were receiving a payment at a higher rate than they were entitled, a deciding officer makes a revised decision on the entitlement. Deciding officers decide the effective date of a revised decision having regard to the new facts or new evidence and the circumstances of the case. This can result in the assessment of an overpayment.

Fraud overpayment cases arise mainly on foot of false declarations by customers concerning their employment, income or family status. In 2010, total overpayments amounted to €83.4m representing 0.41% of total Departmental expenditure. Overpayments arising from activity suspected as fraudulent amounted to €25.9m in 2010.

The Department is fully committed to recovering 100% of overpayments arising as a result of suspected fraud or error. Effective debt recovery is seen as an integral part of the deterrent to fraudulent claiming. Debt holders should be aware that a debt owing to my Department will remain on their records until fully recovered. This will result in a reduction of all future entitlements up to and including state pension. Following the death of a customer who owes a debt, the Department has a claim on any estate remaining. Persons who have a debt and who are no longer dependent on social welfare are required to repay this debt as quickly as possible. The Department actively pursues the recovery of all overpayments including the initiation of civil proceedings where appropriate.

The Deputy should note that I recently launched a new Fraud Initiative (2011 – 2013) which is aimed at putting in place a range of actions to combat fraud and abuse of the social welfare system and to ensure there is public confidence and trust in the system. As Minister, I am very conscious of the need to protect public money and I am determined to ensure that abuse of the system is prevented and is dealt with effectively when detected.