Draft Social Security (Electronic Communications) Order 2011
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
† Beresford, Sir Paul (Mole Valley) (Con)
† Evans, Graham (Weaver Vale) (Con)
† Fullbrook, Lorraine (South Ribble) (Con)
† Grayling, Chris (Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions)
† Greenwood, Lilian (Nottingham South) (Lab)
† Hames, Duncan (Chippenham) (LD)
Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead and Kilburn) (Lab)
Jamieson, Cathy (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab/Co-op)
† McGovern, Jim (Dundee West) (Lab)
† McVey, Esther (Wirral West) (Con)
Moon, Mrs Madeleine (Bridgend) (Lab)
† Murray, Sheryll (South East Cornwall) (Con)
† Norman, Jesse (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)
Paisley, Ian (North Antrim) (DUP)
† Smith, Miss Chloe (Norwich North) (Con)
† Stuart, Ms Gisela (Birmingham, Edgbaston) (Lab)
† Timms, Stephen (East Ham) (Lab)
† Willott, Jenny (Cardiff Central) (LD)
Mark Etherton, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Fourth Delegated Legislation Committee
Wednesday 8 June 2011
[Mrs Anne Main in the Chair]
Draft Social Security (Electronic Communications) Order 2011
2.30 pm
The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the Draft Social Security (Electronic Communications) Order 2011.
Good afternoon, Mrs Main. It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time. I have no doubt that the shadow Minister, who takes a keen interest in matters technological, will have some questions, but I believe that the order is uncontroversial. It is part of a process of modernisation that began under the previous Government. We are improving the Department’s customer service delivery and increasing access to services through self-serve online channels, and that is done partly through a secure, automated online service.
Legislation currently requires the use of paper documents and signatures. For example, the jobseeker’s agreement has to be in writing, and the claimant has to sign it on paper at the jobcentre. The order allows us for the first time to start putting this process online in a number of ways, and I shall explain briefly how it is to work. The key purpose of the order is to allow the jobseeker’s allowance to be claimed, administered and maintained online. It will allow the online administration of other benefits—for instance, by enabling customers to record changes in their circumstances online.
I reassure the shadow Minister on one important point. He questioned me about the process of automation during the Committee stage of the Welfare Reform Bill, and I said at that stage that we were not moving to automate on all fronts. The order is part of the jigsaw puzzle of systems that will eventually evolve into universal credit. We are talking about the creation of a process that will migrate into universal credit. It is not a stand-alone project; it is time-limited and will become redundant in 2013 when universal credit is introduced. It is part of an ongoing process of automation.
The order will permit people to claim the jobseeker’s allowance online, and it will enable them to notify changes—for instance, to income or address—online. It will also enable us to record signatures on electronic pads. That is designed primarily to reduce the risk of identity fraud. It does not mean that a claimant will be able simply to sign a claim form online, and that will be that. New claimants will still be expected to attend a jobcentre and to sign a form in person as part of the routine signing-on process. People will still be expected to attend a jobcentre once a fortnight, as is the norm at the moment. When claimants attend the jobcentre to lodge their signature, it will be captured electronically. It can then be used as a reference point for future
validation. Such checks will be simpler and quicker, which will be a significant improvement on the current paper-based transactions.Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central) (LD): I understand that when the order was debated in the other place, Lord Freud suggested that it might one day be possible for electronic signatures to be given under some sort of PIN system. That would presumably leave the claimant more open to identity fraud and so on. What plans does the Minister have to tighten up security measures to ensure that that fraud could not happen if the system were expanded in the way in which Lord Freud suggested?
Chris Grayling: Technology permits several different permutations for the future. Clearly, since we are storing within the Department for Work and Pensions databases details of bank accounts, addresses and dates of birth, it is of paramount importance that there is proper security within our systems. That was something that I was keen to assure myself of with regard to the measure and the use of electronic signatures. Indeed, one of the things that we have made sure of in the run-up to the launch of the Work programme is that our providers have similar security measures where they have access to personalised information.
Electronic signatures will be stored in a different place from the other data about an individual. That policy is intended to make it more difficult for someone to hack into the systems and obtain the full data, plus the signature. We also work closely with Government Communications Headquarters and other Government security advisers to make sure that we provide appropriate protection for what are highly sensitive and important security matters. However, should we develop systems further, it will be necessary to put in place appropriate security measures. I cannot give details because the position is hypothetical at the moment, but I assure the hon. Lady that that is our intention. That is particularly important in the context of an individual’s circumstances.
An important part of making the proposal compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998 is ensuring that claimants will still be able to contact the Department in writing or by telephone. The new system is not compulsory; it is an additional channel that people can use to access the support that they need. We know that about 86% of recipients of jobseeker’s allowance use the internet, and that 67% have home internet access. We have surveyed those who use our benefit system, and 40% said that they would like to be able to access information about benefits and lodge details of the change in their circumstances online, and an additional proportion of people would consider doing so.
The order opens up a channel that has the benefit of being what people want. It will also enable us to continue to modernise, streamline and make the organisation more efficient. It is simply an important part of the modernisation process. There will be training for Jobcentre Plus staff, so that they can help people to be aware of how they can access the systems. Those who are likely to do so will be encouraged to take up use of an online service. It goes without saying that that is facilitating, not instructing, and that there will be no obligation to use such a system.
I hope that, as we increasingly automate the systems that collect and process information, we will remove some of the boring repetition sometimes found in the fortnightly interviews in the jobcentre, and provide a basis for the efficiency savings that all of us, throughout Government, need to find at present. The order is all about creating a 21st-century system. It is about building on work that was started by the previous Government. We have continued some very sensible projects that they put in place, and no doubt we will continue with the sort of innovation to which the hon. Member for Cardiff Central referred. The order is no more complex and no more problematic than that, and I hope that the Committee will regard it as a positive and sensible step forward.
2.39 pm
Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab): I, too, am delighted to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mrs Main. As the Minister anticipated, I welcome the opportunity for the increased automation of the benefit system that the order will permit. He is right to draw attention to the potential gains, in both efficiency and convenience, that will result from the order for people using the benefit system.
I wish to press the Minister a little on his point about not coercing people into using online methods if they do not wish to do so. That point is set out in the explanatory memorandum, which states:
“This Order is enabling rather than mandatory.”
I want to ask him about that, because his Department published a business plan last month, and one of its actions is to increase the proportion of JSA claims made online to 80% by September 2013. I wonder where the balance will lie between encouraging, cajoling or perhaps even compelling people, if the 80% target appears to be off track later. It may be the Department’s view that the proportion will rise to 80% without any particular effort. I simply want to know how the Minister sees the 80% target being achieved.
Of course, some would argue that the Government should at some point shut off offline applications. There is a case to be made that that is the way to achieve real efficiency savings. It would also force people to go online, including people who do not have online access at the moment, with potentially lots of other benefits for them in due course. As I read the explanatory notes, and from what the Minister said a few moments ago, it seems that the Government have rejected that view, at least for now. However, can the Minister confirm that it is not the Government’s intention to force people at any time in the foreseeable future to apply online? Last month’s business plan referred to publishing the first annual data on online applications this month, during the course of June. Will the Minister confirm that it is indeed the Department’s intention to publish that information this month? If so, will he tell us when this month it will appear?
I have several questions about how the Government will use the powers in the order. As the Minister knows, I think the Government are heading for quite serious trouble with their plans in this area as we head towards universal credit. He said that the order paves the way for that transition to some extent, but I think there is an urgent need for a rethink to avoid serious problems down the line. It is interesting to follow how the Department’s thinking has developed. We have had three business plans—
The Chair: Order. I do hope that the right hon. Gentleman will stay within the scope of this particular, rather tight, order.
Stephen Timms: Indeed, Mrs Main. I am seeking to establish how the Government will use the powers in the order. I hope that is an appropriate use of the Committee’s time. The Department has published three business plans in the past 12 months. The first one was in July 2010. It said that the Department was going to move jobseeker’s allowance and state pensions to online applications, and that it would shift more of our major benefits to online applications, supported by end-to-end processing. That was to start in November 2011. If that is still the plan, it would be this order that would facilitate that move, as I understand it.
However, by November 2010, a much more ambitious target was set in that month’s business plan, which stated that the Department would introduce automated end-to-end processing of applications, enquiries and changes of circumstances for all benefits, beginning with JSA. That was going to start this month, in June 2011, and be finished by October 2012. As far as I can see, that ambition is reflected in the order and the explanatory notes that accompany it.
Since November 2010, we have had another business plan, published last month, which substantially rowed back from the ambitious goal of November 2010. That plan stated that the Department’s aim now is significantly to improve jobseeker’s allowance online by fully automating at least 75% of the processes, with the remainder still requiring a value-added intervention from staff. We are now in a position where it is not even the whole of jobseeker’s allowance that will be put online, but just 75% of it. For the rest of the benefits system, which is referred to in the explanatory notes for this order, it appears that the move online will not happen.
The No. 10 website, with which the Minister will be familiar, because I have put this point to him before, had a helpful schedule explaining why the business plan had changed between November last year and May this year. It stated:
“The new text has been drafted in recognition that full automation of all benefits is not possible. One of the primary reasons is that a significant element of the decision/award process, including applying and checking JSA conditionality, will continue to require human intervention. A second reason is that there are a number of complex ‘exception’ cases, for example Share Fishermen, which would be extremely difficult to automate. The aspiration is to maximise automation, rather than to fully automate benefits processing.”
That is a substantial rowing back from the much more ambitious intention set out last November.
As far as I can see, the explanatory notes for this order reflect what was intended in November, rather than what is intended now. Paragraphs 8.2 and 8.3 of the explanatory notes tell us that there has been lots of consultation about these ambitious plans for automation. Paragraph 8.3 states:
“In addition, presentations have been made at the Welsh, English and National Forums with regards to the new online facilities for”
income support, employment and support allowance, disability living allowance and attendance allowance. It goes on to say:
“these forums were attended by customer representative groups and have strongly supported the progression of the new update service.”
Everyone was enthusiastic, but the Government have now decided, according to the business plan published last month, that they will not go ahead with online facilities for income support. The migration that was envisaged, which was consulted on and enthusiastically received, will not take place at least until the introduction of universal credit.
I am puzzled—as the Minister knows, because I have made the point before—as to why a new ambition, set for the Department last November, has been so substantially watered down in the business plan. The order will be much less fully used than was intended in November 2010, but it is that original intention that is reflected in the explanatory memorandum, rather than the Government’s current intentions. Can the Minister confirm that the Government will not be proceeding with online income support, although the explanatory memorandum indicates that they will?
There is some sport to be had here at the Government’s expense, as the Department is unclear about what it is doing. There is, however, a serious issue here, which the Minister touched on in his opening remarks: what will happen when universal credit is introduced? That is due to happen by October 2013. As the Minister knows, I have said from the beginning that I do not believe that that date will be achieved. I am even more sure of that now than when I first said it. That uncertainty is strongly underlined by the fact that the Government, having said only last November that they would use the order to automate the whole benefit system, are now telling us that it is impossible to do so. They are not saying that it is not cost-effective to do so; they are saying it is impossible to do so. That is what the note in the schedule on the No. 10 website tells us. If the Minister can give us any reassurance on that front, I would welcome it.
I want to put some parting questions to the Minister. Will there need to be a further order to do this job for universal credit, or is it the Department’s belief that the current order will apply to universal credit, when that is introduced in October 2013? What will be the target for online applications for universal credit? Will it be 80%, as it is for JSA in the latest departmental business plan? Will it be more than that, because the system might have progressed by 2013, or will it be less, because benefits other than JSA are not going to be automated, even though the order would give the Government the power to automate them?
The explanatory memorandum makes it clear that, for current benefits, those who prefer using postal, face-to-face and telephony channels rather than applying online can continue to do so. Will that still be true for universal credit or do the Government envisage that, when universal credit is introduced, there will be a requirement, at least in some circumstances, for people to submit applications and changes of circumstances online rather than by more traditional methods?
My scepticism about the achievability of the Government’s timetable is reinforced by the change of heart that is demonstrated by how the order will be used. Of course, if the Minister can provide reassurance on any of those points, I should very much welcome it.
2.51 pm
Chris Grayling: I always admire the right hon. Gentleman’s creativity in managing to turn a fairly simple debate into a series of questions about his favourite topic: the ability or otherwise of the team that is working on universal credit to deliver on time for 2013 and the issues that surround that. Let me walk through some of his points. I am not sure that I shall respond entirely to his journey through the business plans, which are entirely consistent with what has happened.
On the right hon. Gentleman’s point about coercion, we believe that the 80% target is a realistic estimate of the number of people who, with some guidance and encouragement—certainly not coercion—will be able to and will wish to access our services online over the period described in the business plan. We start from a pretty high point—40% of claimants want to use an online system now, and in total, 67% have internet access at home. On ground level, therefore, those people are using the internet and it is perfectly practical for them to access our services online. The evidence shows that they are pretty ready to do so with a bit of help and guidance. We are very keen to see people on benefits develop internet skills to have access to digital services, and we are confident that 80% is a realistic goal. There is certainly no intention of applying shock treatment to deliver it, but it is something that we will encourage people to do.
Stephen Timms: Can the Minister confirm that the first set of data about online applications is going to be published this month, as was envisaged in the business plan?
Chris Grayling: The truth is that, off the top of my head, I cannot. I will happily drop the right hon. Gentleman an e-mail or a letter later to confirm that one way or the other. I am genuinely not sure at the moment, but I shall let him know.
We do not intend to shut off offline applications. I am particularly concerned to ensure that the most vulnerable claimants, such as people who have learning difficulties and those who come from particularly difficult backgrounds, who have genuine issues in using and accessing online services, should not lose the opportunity make offline applications. Although I would never say never, it is certainly not our intention to close off access to those altogether.
The right hon. Gentleman referred to that matter in his question on universal credit. I expect that most people will access universal credit using digital systems in an automated manner, but not everyone will. Some people will still sit down in a jobcentre or talk on the phone with an adviser and work through their applications.
Stephen Timms: Does the Minister envisage that the choice will be voluntary on the part of the person who is applying for universal credit, or that some people might be permitted to apply by more conventional means but others will be required to do so online?
Chris Grayling: To be honest, a screening process to try to categorise whether someone is suited or not to applying online would be much too bureaucratic, so I envisage the online system as being voluntary. I think in
the world in which we live the vast majority of people will wish to use automated systems, but I do not see us trying to screen someone to judge whether they fit an entitlement category.On the percentage target for universal credit, we have no target beyond the 80% at the moment. My expectation is that it will grow steadily as years go by, because increasingly access to digital data services and online services will become the norm throughout society, and the number of people who do not use those channels will become smaller and smaller, but we certainly have not set an additional target for universal credit. Of course, universal credit will not be fully up and running until much later in the decade, so we are looking some time ahead, to a point when, given the pace of technological change, who knows what will have happened?
As to a further order, the one that is before the Committee does the job. It will make possible the use of online services through existing regulation and legislation. We do not expect further regulations to be required. The order is a generic set of provisions and although initially it is being used for the JSA it can, we believe, be used subsequently.
The right hon. Gentleman highlighted the various business plans. First, we shall use the provisions to allow online notification of, for example, a change of circumstances with respect to all benefits. Primarily the provisions are for JSA, but that will not stop the order being used for notification of change of circumstances with respect to income support.
I should just correct myself on one point and say that, as sometimes happens, we may need to make one further regulatory change before universal credit comes into use.
What I have outlined does not mean that we shall create new systems to provide complicated online application processes for income support, which is due to be phased out. JSA, of course, will continue as contributory JSA after the introduction of universal credit, and the systems that we are putting in place will continue into the world of universal credit. Some aspects of the changes—particularly the notification of changes of circumstances—will apply to other benefits as well.
In his inimitable way, the right hon. Gentleman has identified what he sees as changes of strategy and major discrepancies between the different elements of the business plan. I would argue that what is happening is entirely consistent with a set of regulations that are designed to give us the power to allow people to do the things in question online, with the goal of building the number of online interactions to 80% and an acceptance that some processes cannot be automated—but where the goal is to go digital as fast and practically as we sensibly can. That is all within a context where there is a group of people who increasingly want to access services online, but who cannot all do so, and where it makes no sense, with some parts of the system, for us to go down the full online route now, because of the replacement systems coming down the track in the near future.
Stephen Timms: I just want to pick up the point about consistency, because there clearly is not consistency. Last November the business plan said that the Department would
“introduce automated end to end processing of applications, enquiries and changes of circumstances for all benefits”.
Last month it said it could not do that because full automation of all benefits is not possible. My alarm is that that ambitious target was set out in November after the universal credit White Paper, or at about the same time. Now it is recognised that what was envisaged then is impossible.
Chris Grayling: Well, if we didn’t have a few small changes of nuance the right hon. Gentleman would have nothing to occupy his time. The truth is that we are developing a strategy that we are trying to ensure will fit as well as possible the needs of the claimants we work with, the need of Government to become more effective and efficient, and the need to continue the good work done by the previous Government in modernising the way Jobcentre Plus works, by using technology.
As I have said, some of the projects that we want the order to make possible were originated by the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues, whom I commend for their work. We want to make sure that we get things right. We are looking at every nook and cranny to understand where issues may arise. It is important that we do that when developing new systems. We work exhaustively to make sure that we have considered all eventualities and have maximised the potential of what we are doing without reaching a point where we are either overburdening the systems or taking unrealistic decisions about what technology can or cannot do.
Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): The Minister speaks about all eventualities. Clearly some of the people making use of those online services might do so through terminals with internet connections outside their home or workplace, perhaps in libraries or public buildings. Given that they may be using shared terminals, will there be safeguards in place to ensure that, even if people do not log off satisfactorily, their personal data are not exposed to future users of those shared machines?
Chris Grayling: The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. One of the things we have to bear in mind consistently throughout this process is the sensitivity of the personalised data. We have introduced a number of design features in the systems that we are putting together which minimise the risk of customer details being disseminated in the way he suggests. In addition, we are building messaging into the systems to say, “Log off. Don’t leave this on the screen.” We are approaching this from both the educational and the practical systems protection point of view. He makes a valid point.
Members from all parties will recognise from going around the country looking at the work that has been done by community groups, local libraries and so on, that we are fortunate that there is quite widespread good access to IT across our different communities. Very often, it is provided by the voluntary sector and commendations to that sector for having done that. Therefore, it is quite likely that claimants will in future access online services from those facilities and it is important that we do as the hon. Gentleman described.
I look forward to continuing to debate the broader technology issues with the right hon. Member for East Ham. I am confident that we are on the right track. He is less so. We will undoubtedly return to these matters, perhaps as early as next week when we return to the
Welfare Reform Bill. For this afternoon this order is simply about getting the permission of the Committee to use the systems that have been developed in the past few years by both Governments to provide better access to services to the people who need them. I hope on that basis that the Committee will be able to endorse the order.That the Committee has considered the Draft Social Security (Electronic Communications) Order 2011.