Why blog on benefit fraud?

Why blog on benefit fraud? There are plenty of issues out there such as the broken society, or saving the planet.

They're well covered in the blogosphere. Benefit fraud isn't.

Of course we can name other egregious spongers on the state besides the benefit fraudsters we cover. Jacqui Smith and Alistair Darling should know better. And of course they do.

Benefit fraud is big bucks. The government admits to an annual £800m. The media can't even get that right. The BBC and the Daily Mail have been quoting figures of £400m or £440m. So we aim to combat basic ignorance. Numbers appear one day in public documents and are forgotten the next.

But as this blog has regularly shown, the true benefit fraud total is at least £2bn a year. That's more than 10% of state spending on transport, or industry and agriculture. Which is big money, especially when state debt is ballooning out of control and the talk is of big cuts in state spending being needed.

Critics of the welfare state stress the debilitating effect of welfare. Karen Matthews is one who existed on it. Another beneficiary is Sian Robbins, a single mother of 17 who is now expecting triplets after having unprotected sex with her new boyfriend. She lives on benefits and says of her pregnancy 'It's not got anything to do with anyone else'. That's as long as you can support the brood you're producing, dear.

Now there's no suggestion that Sian is a benefit fraudster. But she's a symbol of the expectation that the state will provide, whatever you do. There is no personal responsibility to support your own family. Indeed, her 18 year old boyfriend says

She loves being a mum - even if one baby does have a problem we'll still love them. Sian wants me to be at home with her until the babies are older, so I'll be signing on.

Thus is the scope of the welfare state condemned.

This blog does not seek to range so widely. All but the most spectacular reports of benefit fraud are local, and we aim to pull them together. We also look at enforcement. It is slow, expensive and patchy. Ministers keep repeating how successful it is, so things must be bad.

Punishments for benefit fraud are illogical and too often nominal, as the local reports show. The enforcement apparatus will never be able to deal with the sheer volume of benefit fraud, so offending has to be damped down at source. One way is to make sentencing meaningful and transparent. Benefit thieves who do not receive an immediate prison sentence should always have to do unpaid work. Administrative penalties require payment of a 30% penalty of the amount defrauded. In court the penalty should be at least 50%.

And stop all benefits until the penalty and the fraudulently obtained money have been repaid. Let there be a period of six months when people can confess and be dealt with under the present sentencing regime. After that, fraudsters who need benefits will have to find a charity set up to assist benefit cheats. Doesn't sound likely, does it? But if you wouldn't want to give your money voluntarily to benefit fraudsters, why should the state force you to?

This blog aims to inform, appal and campaign.