What a spineless nation...

dark crystal

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

What exactly is wrong with reporting fraud? Do we not have a duty to report crime?

I spent 6 months unemployed, trying my damnest to get work and unable to get the dole due to the means test. It galled me, and still does, that I was expected to depend upon my parents in my twenties when there are 1000s of fit well people who are well able to work but too lazy to do so in the dole queue, not to mention to those claiming entitlements they don't need.

Why should protect these people? They are no better than theives.

Audrey, the situation is not always as black and white as people make out.

Someone living on €188 a week may well be trying to find work, but not having any success. A huge bill comes in and this person has to pay it, but the dole doesn't even come near to what they need to pay this bill, get food on the table and pay the mortgage as well.

Someone offers them two days work, for which they can earn enough to pay this bill, so they take it and don't declare it to SW, as it will mean jumping through a pile red tape and possibly losing future payments.

Would you seriously consider turning this person in?

uberalles

dark crystal wrote: »

Audrey, the situation is not always as black and white as people make out.

Someone living on €188 a week may well be trying to find work, but not having any success. A huge bill comes in and this person has to pay it, but the dole doesn't even come near to what they need to pay this bill, get food on the table and pay the mortgage as well.

Someone offers them two days work, for which they can earn enough to pay this bill, so they take it and don't declare it to SW, as it will mean jumping through a pile red tape and possibly losing future payments.

Would you seriously consider turning this person in?

They should be strung up like a side of beef;)

RainbowRose81

Well social services don't consider different types of families and the personal circumstances of each family. Education is the only way to make your life better and free yourself from the welfare system. To get a decent job you need to have a 3rd level qualification, they don't know how hard it is for someone from a marginised area who has no education to go to college as a mature student to be able to have a couple of thousand to pay the 3rd level fee each year.

RainbowRose81

uberalles wrote: »

They should be strung up like a side of beef;)

Yea well you obvious don't live in the real world. I know a girl who lives in rural Ireland, there are no buses it's about 10 miles to the nearest village and over an hours drive to the nearest hospital, she is unemployed and has no educational qualifications, she often suffers from depression but doesn't want to be on disability allowance because of the stigma, she is on medication though.
She is a single mother to a 3 year old and her partner is living with her, he is working part-time, some weeks he might get 25 hours. They rent a little house, they are a family but the social welfare system doesn't see them as a family, they don't understand they depend on each other practially and financially to get by in the countryside where they don't know have anyone else there for them. She cannot afford to go to college because of the cost of childcare but there is some chance she can get the grant and her partner won't because he was working fulltime up til two years ago, all he has is a FAS course.
You really need to wake up and see the reality of people's situations before you judge others because not all people on welfare want to be on welfare and choose this sad life of being trapped in welfare. I know there are people who work full time and are welfare, that is wrong, they lie and decieve people taking the money from the vulnerable marginised people in society who really need it such as single parents who are strugging to get by and people who have disabilities and illnesses.

EGAR

gerryo777 wrote: »

It's like a timewarp on here. Late 80's into early 90's it was the same.
The 'unmarried mothers' had the country f***ed.
This thread is bull****e, voyeurism is alive and well in little old Ireland.

Wrong, me dear. I am a mother and an unmarried one at that . Not every unmarried mother is a lone parent and not every lone parent scams the system.

However, the case I mentioned is a real one and highlights the inept SWO's working on many of these cases.

And you will find that *voyeurism* has nothing to do with it.

gerryo777

EGAR wrote: »

Wrong, me dear. I am a mother and an unmarried one at that . Not every unmarried mother is a lone parent and not every lone parent scams the system.

However, the case I mentioned is a real one and highlights the inept SWO's working on many of these cases.

And you will find that *voyeurism* has nothing to do with it.

I know that.
The point I was making is that people who come on here blaming others, like lone parents, people who lost their jobs or people who aren't as fortunate as themselves, should mind their own business and get on with their own lives.
That's what I meant by 'voyeurism', watching with an unhealthy interest in what others are doing!
It's not people who are now struggling who have this country the way it is.

WakeUp

When they go after the bankers and all the other well to do folk and start locking them up for what they did then the state can preach about Welfare fraud even though I dont agree with the system being screwed by people who are working full time and claiming benefits. A few nixer's here and there to makes ends meet when you cant find a job to put food on the table how could you possibly rat on someone for something like that - this isn't nazi Germany. The fraud committed by the overlords and captains of industry in many instances was taken out of the country now that's the average person being well and truly screwed.

People cry "well I'm paying taxes and people who claim social payments aren't etc etc.." do the letters VAT mean anything to them?? Doesn't matter if you work or are unemployed WE ALL PAY TAX in some form. And the VAT rate has gone up from 21% to 23%. Money given out through social welfare, a percentage of it is returned to the government just look at France for example think its something like 50/60% of state income is obtained through VAT and that's the man and woman on the street making that possible through spending money on goods and services. People on Welfare spend money on these things to you know. Yes screwing the system is wrong in many ways but that figure of 645 million or whatever it is I would suggest is a little misleading as part of it will eventually make its way back to the government and in turn the cycle is repeated. And rats can suck my ass unless they ratting on a murderer, rapist, pedo some animal like that. No one likes a rat not even the Guards they think their filth too they just use them.

gerryo777

WakeUp wrote: »

When they go after the bankers and all the other well to do folk and start locking them up for what they did then the state can preach about Welfare fraud even though I dont agree with the system being screwed by people who are working full time and claiming benefits. A few nixer's here and there to makes ends meet when you cant find a job to put food on the table how could you possibly rat on someone for something like that - this isn't nazi Germany. The fraud committed by the overlords and captains of industry in many instances was taken out of the country now that's the average person being well and truly screwed.

People cry "well I'm paying taxes and people who claim social payments aren't etc etc.." do the letters VAT mean anything to them?? Doesn't matter if you work or are unemployed WE ALL PAY TAX in some form. And the VAT rate has gone up from 21% to 23%. Money given out through social welfare, a percentage of it is returned to the government just look at France for example think its something like 50/60% of state income is obtained through VAT and that's the man and woman on the street making that possible through spending money on goods and services. People on Welfare spend money on these things to you know. Yes screwing the system is wrong in many ways but that figure of 645 million or whatever it is I would suggest is a little misleading as part of it will eventually make its way back to the government and in turn the cycle is repeated. And rats can suck my ass unless they ratting on a murderer, rapist, pedo some animal like that. No one likes a rat not even the Guards they think their filth too they just use them.

Exactly.
And out of that figure of €645 million, only 15-20% of that was actual fraud, the rest was mistakes made by the dept. of social welfare in calculating what each person was entitled to.
But sure it makes a good headline for the government.

EGAR

gerryo777 wrote: »

I know that.
The point I was making is that people who come on here blaming others, like lone parents, people who lost their jobs or people who aren't as fortunate as themselves, should mind their own business and get on with their own lives.
That's what I meant by 'voyeurism', watching with an unhealthy interest in what others are doing!
It's not people who are now struggling who have this country the way it is.

I think you misunderstood why I posted that. The thread is about reporting Social Welfare fraud, I posted to point out that the system enables fraud much more than actually trying to prevent it, hence the example of the *lone* parent who wasn't one.

I don't care about what my neighbour does. I mind my own business and expect other people to do the same. What I do find interesting in that context is the actual number of prosecutions vs the number of reports, it is totally disproportional so I presume people were vindictive or didn't know as much as they thought which would tie in what you are saying.

gerryo777

EGAR wrote: »

I think you misunderstood why I posted that. The thread is about reporting Social Welfare fraud, I posted to point out that the system enables fraud much more than actually trying to prevent it, hence the example of the *lone* parent who wasn't one.

I don't care about what my neighbour does. I mind my own business and expect other people to do the same. What I do find interesting in that context is the actual number of prosecutions vs the number of reports, it is totally disproportional so I presume people were vindictive or didn't know as much as they thought which would tie in what you are saying.

I think we're both coming from the same place.
You know, for the last couple of years it was the private sector v the public sector, now it's people who work v people who don't.
It keeps the focus off the real crooks in this country.

riclad

Well i know a a woman she had 3 kids with her boyfriend in 6 years ,she got a council house.HE was living with her ,an electrician on a good wage.
I Just wonder is there any system, does any one ask ,from welfare ,whos the father.he wanted her off the book ,she says no .I Want my financial independence, i want my own income.
i don,t wanna be racist ,but i reckon theres 1000s of people from foreign countrys ,fly in here ,sign on ,collect the dole plus rent allowance .
i,d be more worried about that than some bloke who does a nixer now and again to pay the gas bill.
There was some td on newstalk ,said we don,t have a proper modern id identification system to prevent welfare fraud by irish or immigrants.

but i,d say the bankers ,financial fraudsters ,stupid politicians
have done more harm to the country than people who defraud welfare.BUT I still think all fraud is morally wrong.

gerryo777

riclad wrote: »

Well i know a a woman she had 3 kids with her boyfriend in 6 years ,she got a council house.HE was living with her ,an electrician on a good wage.
I Just wonder is there any system, does any one ask ,from welfare ,whos the father.he wanted her off the book ,she says no .I Want my financial independence, i want my own income.
i don,t wanna be racist ,but i reckon theres 1000s of people from foreign countrys ,fly in here ,sign on ,collect the dole plus rent allowance .
i,d be more worried about that than some bloke who does a nixer now and again to pay the gas bill.
There was some td on newstalk ,said we don,t have a proper modern id identification system to prevent welfare fraud by irish or immigrants.

Oh FFS, Not everyone who lives in a council house is claiming social welfare!

EGAR

riclad wrote: »

i don,t wanna be racist ,but

I stopped reading there.

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

Exactly.
And out of that figure of €645 million, only 15-20% of that was actual fraud, the rest was mistakes made by the dept. of social welfare in calculating what each person was entitled to.
But sure it makes a good headline for the government.

Where do you get the crazy idea that 80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

Where do you get the crazy idea that 80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?

Dr. Sean Healy - Social Justice Ireland
I reckon he read the whole report, did you?

stupidusername

dvpower wrote: »

Where do you get the crazy idea that 80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?

try reading the thread.

link

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

Dr. Sean Healy - Social Justice Ireland
I reckon he read the whole report, did you?

stupidusername wrote: »

try reading the thread.

link

The IT report says that 21% was due to fraud. It does not say that '80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?'. Nor does the DSP press release.


Maybe you should both have a reread.

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

The IT report says that 21% was due to fraud. It does not say that '80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?'. Nor does the DSP press release.


Maybe you should both have a reread.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/housesoftheoireachtas/libraryresearch/spotlights/Spotlight_Social_Welfare_Fraud.pdf
Sorry, my mistake. 69% due to error. Page 2.

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/housesoftheoireachtas/libraryresearch/spotlights/Spotlight_Social_Welfare_Fraud.pdf

Is there something particular in that PDF that your attempting to point out?:rolleyes:

stupidusername

dvpower wrote: »

The IT report says that 21% was due to fraud. It does not say that '80% to 85% was 'mistakes made by the dept' ?'. Nor does the DSP press release.


Maybe you should both have a reread.

The only two reasons given in the report are fraud and error. what other reason could there be?

gerryo777 wrote: »

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/housesoftheoireachtas/libraryresearch/spotlights/Spotlight_Social_Welfare_Fraud.pdf
Sorry, my mistake. 69% due to error. Page 2.

That's in 2009 & 2010.

gerryo777

stupidusername wrote: »

The only two reasons given in the report are fraud and error. what other reason could there be?



That's in 2009 & 2010.

That's the last report I can find at the moment.

stupidusername

gerryo777 wrote: »

That's the last report I can find at the moment.

that's the most recent report, but it's just that reference is to the 2009 & 2010 figures.

gerryo777

stupidusername wrote: »

that's the most recent report, but it's just that reference is to the 2009 & 2010 figures.

Well what figures can we work off, something burton throws out there to make herself sound like she's doing something....

Dudess

Thread where Irish person moans about Irish complacency from their keyboard therefore being just as complacent: number 95446

gerryo777

Dudess wrote: »

Thread where Irish person moans about Irish complacency from their keyboard therefore being just as complacent: number 95446

95446 ?

dvpower

stupidusername wrote: »

The only two reasons given in the report are fraud and error. what other reason could there be?

I have some experience working in this area.
a common scenario is where there is some indication of possible fraud (maybe a fraud report or an inconsistent social insurance contribution record).

The claimant is called in for interview by the fraud investigation team and made to sign an up to date declaration that his claim is true and accurate. The next week he fails to sign on.
This can't be categorised as a fraud prevention, nor as an administrative mistake, but can be classified as a benefit saving pursuant to an investigation.

I'd love to see the explanation for the seemingly huge administrative mistakes. People should lose their jobs for letting millions of euro be paid out 'by mistake'

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

I have some experience working in this area.
a common scenario is where there is some indication of possible fraud (maybe a fraud report or an inconsistent social insurance contribution record).

The claimant is called in for interview by the fraud investigation team and made to sign an up to date declaration that his claim is true and accurate. The next week he fails to sign on.
This can't be categorised as a fraud prevention, nor as an administrative mistake, but can be classified as a benefit saving pursuant to an investigation.

I'd love to see the explanation for the seemingly huge administrative mistakes. People should lose their jobs for letting millions of euro be paid out 'by mistake'

That last sentence is the funniest thing I've ever seen on boards.
No offence intended!

stupidusername

gerryo777 wrote: »

Well what figures can we work off, something burton throws out there to make herself sound like she's doing something....

in the same report it gives the figure of 21.2% of overpayments being due to fraud. the other reasons for overpayment are customer error and official error.

“The Department (for Work and
Pensions) defines fraud as those
cases where customers deliberately
claim money to which they are not
entitled. Customer error occurs when
customers provide information to the
Department which is inaccurate,
incomplete or untimely, but without
dishonest intent, and as a result the
benefit paid is inaccurate. Official
error occurs when officials fail to
apply specific rules or do not take
into account all the notified
circumstances

Pg4

So I haven't read so far in that report a further breakdown as to how much was due to official error or customer error.

dvpower

stupidusername wrote: »

in the same report it gives the figure of 21.2% of overpayments being due to fraud. the other reasons for overpayment are customer error and official error.



Pg4

So I haven't read so far in that report a further breakdown as to how much was due to official error or customer error.

In fairness, Customer error can easily be seen as fraud that can't be proven.
They really should break down the Customer error from the Official error, so that officials can be held accountable for their errors.

stupidusername

dvpower wrote: »

In fairness, Customer error can easily be seen as fraud that can't be proven.
They really should break down the Customer error from the Official error, so that officials can be held accountable for their errors.

well you can't tell that they're not right either.

but yeah I agree it should be broken down further, especially as the whole thing is labelled as how much is being lost through fraud. but I haven't read the whole thing yet, way too tired, so maybe it is broken down, I don't know.

dvpower

stupidusername wrote: »

well you can't tell that they're not right either.

but yeah I agree it should be broken down further, especially as the whole thing is labelled as how much is being lost through fraud. but I haven't read the whole thing yet, way too tired, so maybe it is broken down, I don't know.

It is hard to make sense of it.

It's pretty shocking that they mix the crime figures and the honest mistake / incompetence figures all in the same release. There should be a few sets of stats;
1. stuff we've paid out by mistake (but have copped on to now).
2. stuff that was overclaimed, by mistake, by our customers (but we've copped on to now)
3. stuff people defrauded from us (that we know about)
4. stuff that may have been defrauded from us (but certainly isn't now because of things we did).

Actually there are probably a couple of other categories that don't come to mind - but the point is that just because it can't be categories as fraud, doesn't automatically mean that its down to DSP error.

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

It is hard to make sense of it.

It's pretty shocking that they mix the crime figures and the honest mistake / incompetence figures all in the same release. There should be a few sets of stats;
1. stuff we've paid out by mistake (but have copped on to now).
2. stuff that was overclaimed, by mistake, by our customers (but we've copped on to now)
3. stuff people defrauded from us (that we know about)
4. stuff that may have been defrauded from us (but certainly isn't now because of things we did).

Actually there are probably a couple of other categories that don't come to mind - but the point is that just because it can't be categories as fraud, doesn't automatically mean that its down to DSP error.

All very true,
It's a pity burton wasn't as honest in her press conference.

Robdude

Most lasting change happens slowly. Opinions don't change overnight.

When people stop accepting fraud in their neighborhoods, even if it's passively reporting some *criminal* that is breaking the law....they are asserting to themselves that criminal behaviour isn't to be tolerated.

Sure, they aren't doing much - just a phone call. But they are making a connection, 'Someone does something bad, I do SOMETHING about it'.

After a while, that attitude will become the norm. When people are comfortable calling someone to stop a crime, it will be easier for them to do more. When the general attitude is, 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, let's THANK HIM' instead of 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, HE IS A SNITCH!' people are going to be willing to do more than an anonymous phone call. And they'll feel confident that if they do stick their neck out, the general public opinion will be that they are HEROES not scumbags.

And then you'll see people who have the courage and support to speak out against bigger criminals and bigger forms of corruption.

Who benefits of a culture of 'Don't snitch'? Honest people? No. Criminals. Criminals want you to be quiet. Your attitude EMPOWERS criminals to continue breaking the law.

gerryo777

Robdude wrote: »

Most lasting change happens slowly. Opinions don't change overnight.

When people stop accepting fraud in their neighborhoods, even if it's passively reporting some *criminal* that is breaking the law....they are asserting to themselves that criminal behaviour isn't to be tolerated.

Sure, they aren't doing much - just a phone call. But they are making a connection, 'Someone does something bad, I do SOMETHING about it'.

After a while, that attitude will become the norm. When people are comfortable calling someone to stop a crime, it will be easier for them to do more. When the general attitude is, 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, let's THANK HIM' instead of 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, HE IS A SNITCH!' people are going to be willing to do more than an anonymous phone call. And they'll feel confident that if they do stick their neck out, the general public opinion will be that they are HEROES not scumbags.

And then you'll see people who have the courage and support to speak out against bigger criminals and bigger forms of corruption.

Who benefits of a culture of 'Don't snitch'? Honest people? No. Criminals. Criminals want you to be quiet. Your attitude EMPOWERS criminals to continue breaking the law.

One of the problems is that it has to be led from the top.

When all people see are junior ministers getting €17k on top of their already over inflated salaries, claiming un-vouched for expenses just for turning up for work, awarding their 'advisors' extra payments above and beyond what was agreed, PS workers still getting pay rises in the middle of a recession and any amount of other things, it's quite understandable as to why getting a few quid extra on the dole or working a few days in the black market is seen as acceptable.

Freddie59

gerryo777 wrote: »

One of the problems is that it has to be led from the top.

When all people see are junior ministers getting €17k on top of their already over inflated salaries, claiming un-vouched for expenses just for turning up for work, awarding their 'advisors' extra payments above and beyond what was agreed, PS workers still getting pay rises in the middle of a recession and any amount of other things, it's quite understandable as to why getting a few quid extra on the dole or working a few days in the black market is seen as acceptable.

But the day is approaching when all of their gravy trains will be derailed. Ireland is like someone with a limited income who is borrowing from all and sundry, whilst maxing out their credit cards. A limit will be reached. And it will be all over.

gerryo777

Freddie59 wrote: »

But the day is approaching when all of their gravy trains will be derailed. Ireland is like someone with a limited income who is borrowing from all and sundry, whilst maxing out their credit cards. A limit will be reached. And it will be all over.

I would love to think that was the case but the protected interests in our society will always be protected.
Turkeys won't vote for christmas.

Freddie59

gerryo777 wrote: »

I would love to think that was the case but the protected interests in our society will always be protected.
Turkeys won't vote for christmas.

They may not have a choice Gerry.;)

Robdude

gerryo777 wrote: »

One of the problems is that it has to be led from the top.

When all people see are junior ministers getting €17k on top of their already over inflated salaries, claiming un-vouched for expenses just for turning up for work, awarding their 'advisors' extra payments above and beyond what was agreed, PS workers still getting pay rises in the middle of a recession and any amount of other things, it's quite understandable as to why getting a few quid extra on the dole or working a few days in the black market is seen as acceptable.

I totally agree. But you end up in a vicious cycle where everyone uses everyone else's fraud as justification for their own. It's not sustainable.

dark crystal

Robdude wrote: »

Most lasting change happens slowly. Opinions don't change overnight.

When people stop accepting fraud in their neighborhoods, even if it's passively reporting some *criminal* that is breaking the law....they are asserting to themselves that criminal behaviour isn't to be tolerated.

Sure, they aren't doing much - just a phone call. But they are making a connection, 'Someone does something bad, I do SOMETHING about it'.

After a while, that attitude will become the norm. When people are comfortable calling someone to stop a crime, it will be easier for them to do more. When the general attitude is, 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, let's THANK HIM' instead of 'Someone notified the authorities and stopped a criminal, HE IS A SNITCH!' people are going to be willing to do more than an anonymous phone call. And they'll feel confident that if they do stick their neck out, the general public opinion will be that they are HEROES not scumbags.

And then you'll see people who have the courage and support to speak out against bigger criminals and bigger forms of corruption.

Who benefits of a culture of 'Don't snitch'? Honest people? No. Criminals. Criminals want you to be quiet. Your attitude EMPOWERS criminals to continue breaking the law.

But where do these phone calls stop?

I mean, would you report someone you know for illegally downloading music or films?

Would you report two 16 year olds you know engaging in consensual sex?

Would you report your neighbour for having an unlicenced dog or enjoying a spliff every now and again?


If you are going start reporting crime, then you should at least be consistant about it and report every crime someone you know engages in.

It'll end up making you look extremely petty and miserable, but if you're going to make a stand about being a good citizen and reporting crime wherever you see it happening, then that's what you have to do.

Personally, I'd prefer to see a struggling person make a few quid on the side in order to pay their bills, rather than report them and see the money go back into greedy politicians and bankers back pockets.

I guess that just makes me a bad citizen, though.

gerryo777

dark crystal wrote: »

But where do these phone calls stop?

I mean, would you report someone you know for illegally downloading music or films?

Would you report two 16 year olds you know engaging in consensual sex?

Would you report your neighbour for having an unlicenced dog or enjoying a spliff every now and again?


If you are going start reporting crime, then you should at least be consistant about it and report every crime someone you know engages in.

It'll end up making you look extremely petty and miserable, but if you're going to make a stand about being a good citizen and reporting crime wherever you see it happening, then that's what you have to do.

Personally, I'd prefer to see a struggling person make a few quid on the side in order to pay their bills, rather than report them and see the money go back into greedy politicians and bankers back pockets.

I guess that just makes me a bad citizen, though.

Maybe if these SW officers are as brilliant at their jobs as they reckon they are, they should get on with it and do their jobs properly and not be depending on 'snitches' to do it for them.

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

Maybe if these SW officers are as brilliant at their jobs as they reckon they are, they should get on with it and do their jobs properly and not be depending on 'snitches' to do it for them.

And the Gardai should stop answering those 999 calls - lazy bastards, expecting others to report crime that they should be detecting.:rolleyes:

lividduck

gerryo777 wrote: »

Dr. Sean Healy - Social Justice Ireland
I reckon he read the whole report, did you?

Father Sean Healy, and we all know priests dont lie!

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

And the Gardai should stop answering those 999 calls - lazy bastards, expecting others to report crime that they should be detecting.:rolleyes:

Predictable answer.

gerryo777

lividduck wrote: »

Father Sean Healy, and we all know priests dont lie!

What was that about generalisations?

dark crystal

dvpower wrote: »

And the Gardai should stop answering those 999 calls - lazy bastards, expecting others to report crime that they should be detecting.:rolleyes:

Lol, a good point.

The only difference though is that SW fraud is much easier to detect in that a lot of fraud could be stopped if SW officer A's computer just spoke to SW officer B's computer.

The welfare system itself also badly needs to be overhauled and the courts really should be stricter on making absent fathers pay maintenance for their children. Birth certificates are all on computer and these fathers should be chased up and made to pay towards the children they helped create.

I also think it's a mistake to penalise unmarried couples for living under the same roof. A system of family tax credits would be a far better idea imo, but that's a whole other thread!

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

Predictable answer.

I know. You make it too easy.

dark crystal wrote: »

The only difference though is that SW fraud is much easier to detect in that a lot of fraud could be stopped if SW officer A's computer just spoke to SW officer B's computer.

Welfare fraud can be very difficult to detect. For example, if someone is working and claiming, that can go on forever without detection unless they are stupid enough to be using their PPS number. To detect this type of fraud usually requires that someone reports it.

I'm not sure what category of fraud would be detected if Social Welfare computers were linked up (I'm sure they already are)? Maybe better sharing between different government departments (e.g. Social Welfare and Revenue) would detect some fraud.

ilovesleep

It is estimated that SW fraud is 300 million.

Yesterday, wastage was reported in the irish independent from politicians:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/how-political-parties-splash-13m-taxpayers-cash-3023167.html

This is on top of their pay packs, unvouched expenses, their perks and entitlements, and their invested interests and quangos.

The mahon tribunal has so far cost 97 million - one third of the estimated SW fraud. I see there is no uproar about that that very clear example of abuse of the taxpayers money.

It's hyprocritical to actively target one group and not the other. I ask what is activately being done to make politicians toe the line in this broken state?

dvpower

ilovesleep wrote: »

The mahon tribunal has so far cost 97 million - one third of the estimated SW fraud. I see there is no uproar about that that very clear example of abuse of the taxpayers money.

It's hyprocritical to actively target one group and not the other. I ask what is activately being done to make politicians toe the line in this broken state?

Is their fraud going on at the Mahon tribunal?:eek:

Red_Wake

ilovesleep wrote: »

It is estimated that SW fraud is 300 million.

Yesterday, wastage was reported in the irish independent from politicians:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/how-political-parties-splash-13m-taxpayers-cash-3023167.html

This is on top of their pay packs, unvouched expenses, their perks and entitlements, and their invested interests and quangos.

The mahon tribunal has so far cost 97 million - one third of the estimated SW fraud. I see there is no uproar about that that very clear example of abuse of the taxpayers money.

It's hyprocritical to actively target one group and not the other. I ask what is activately being done to make politicians toe the line in this broken state?

Except the Mahon Tribunal took place over a number of years.

Presumably the 300m fraud in social welfare is per annum, and thus is more than 3 times larger than the cost of the Mahon Tribunal.

dvpower

Red_Wake wrote: »

Except the Mahon Tribunal took place over a number of years.

Presumably the 300m fraud in social welfare is per annum, and thus is more than 3 times larger than the cost of the Mahon Tribunal.

Not to mention the millions of taxes that have been collected as a direct result of the Mahon tribunal.