Labour's latest policy announcement

I guess benefits fraud is defrauding the public purse. It is a criminal offence. It sounds a bit of a wishy washy ‘say something they want to hear’ statement. Detail needed.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz5g1h4up0Q

The full speech

I have no desire to hear the full speech thank you.

GSM as I’m sure you’re aware, much more detail will be presented in Labour’s manifesto as soon as the current government decides to announce a GE. No opposition party will give out fine details at this point.

In answer to your question DaisyAnne, yes I would expect the UK to have a law criminalising the defrauding of the public purse. I’m amazed that we don’t already have such a law. I suppose that’s why so many high profile people have recently got away with doing just that!

Why do I doubt that the sort of detail that I as a lawyer would want to see won’t be there Lizzie? It’s no more than a meaningless statement designed to create vote-catching headlines without the public actually stopping to think that fraud is punishable as a crime already.

Defrauding the public purse apples to more than claiming benefits fraudulently. There is also winning lucrative Government contracts for supplying equipment or supplies that never materialises. I daresay there are other ways in which those close to sources of political power can defraud us, too.

Fraud is fraud. It requires intent.

GSM, I’m not sure why you doubt that the necessary detail will be present in Labour’s manifesto. However I am sure that, as a lawyer, you will not make un-evidenced assumptions and will wait until a Manifesto is released before you decide whether there is sufficient detail, or not. Interestingly, I was just listening to a Politics Professor on the radio who said that opposition parties never give detail of their proposed policies ahead of the Manifesto because the party in government is likely to ‘steal them’ (his words).

To see the actual detail a draft Bill would have to be produced.

Ok as a policy.

Trouble is, in my heart of hearts, I dont think there is much he can say to make me vote Lab our.
I am too long in the tooth.

Too long in the tooth to believe anyone's manifesto[think a poster on GN said that is what they go on when deciding who to vote for].
For me, manifestos change all the time, and can be disregarded.

Too long in the tooth to think Lab our will change it's spending ways of the past.

Too long in the tooth to think it may not bow down to whatever group when the going gets tough[though I think Tories are a little more likely to do that nowadays too].

I think Uk politics has made a wholesale shift to the left in the last 15 years or whatever.
Even Tor ies are too left for me nowadays, let alone Labour.

And no, I will not provide evidence, links or much dissection. Take it or leave it. I do not much care.

I find myself withdrawing from much if politics, even in real life.
Have got very jaded.
And I have more things that are taking up more and more of my time.

Germanshepherdsmum is right, some areas of fraud are already covered. I know that they are having to trawl the current laws to bring these people to justice.

It will be interesting to see how this is rolled out nearer the time. Perhaps it will be something along the lines of 'defrauding the public purse while in public office' as that seems the most egregious form of fraud.

It is already a crime. As a former DPP he is well aware of that. I really think he is simply playing to the gallery.

While there are laws that already make defrauding the public purse a crime there is no harm in making a blanket law to catch all methods of fraud as some types may have been missed and new methods could become possible in the future.

All politicians play to the gallery - nothing unique to Keir Starmer. Just watch Prime Minister's Questions to see that every week!

Fraud is fraud - it can be committed in many different ways but you don’t need a separate Act of Parliament for each. There is already a Fraud Act and one of the offences it covers is fraud by abuse of position. Starmer is relying on the public not knowing that but he will know it all too well. Highly misleading attempt to win votes.

He might well change his mind, or water it down

Highly misleading attempt to win votes, like your friend Sunak's claims about clearing up the backlog of asylum cases? Surely as a lawyer, you can see through that pack of lies?

Nobody can blame Labour for being reticent about manifesto items, remember when they were pressing for additional taxation of the energy companies during the early days of the energy crisis? All that refusal from the Tories under Johnson, then Sunak, as chancellor announced a 'Excess Profit Levy' which, of course, wasn't the same thing. Yeah, right.

The fact is that, existing laws or not, if this means that a Labour administration will be going after some of the PPE fast tracked deals, that is good enough for me.

Fancythat
It appears you withdrew from politics 13 + years ago as you obviously missed the cuts to all public services.
Other than that I must assume you and yours have not been affected. Lucky you.

I am not acquainted with Sunak and can say with certainty that he is not my friend.

I don’t take kindly to Starmer trying to fool the public that further legislation is needed and that he will get it done. PPE deals are already under investigation, but as I have already said fraud is a criminal offence requiring intent to defraud - as opposed to a failure to deliver the precise goods contracted to be purchased.

Can you flag up the legislation? Germanshepherdsmum

Don't forget we are all posting our own views. I haven't seen anyone quoting Starmer directly. So your accusation of "playing to the gallery" seems misdirected. It does seem a bit rich for a supporter of Johnson et al to accuse anyone of such a thing.

It would be useful to know which law you think is being duplicated.

MerylStreep

Fancythat
It appears you withdrew from politics 13 + years ago as you obviously missed the cuts to all public services.
Other than that I must assume you and yours have not been affected. Lucky you.

If fancythat wants a government further to the right than the current government I'd like her to elucidate on what she actually wants for this country but she isn't prepared to comment.

MayBee70
It’s quite clear Fancythat doesn’t know what she wants. She obviously gets a Drs appointment when she wants on. There are police on the beat where she lives. Her grandchildren’s schools have enough teachers and no asbestos. No potholes where she lives. I think you get my drift 😉

Fraud Act 2006 DAR. And btw I was never a supporter of Johnson.

DaisyAnneReturns

Can you flag up the legislation? Germanshepherdsmum

Don't forget we are all posting our own views. I haven't seen anyone quoting Starmer directly. So your accusation of "playing to the gallery" seems misdirected. It does seem a bit rich for a supporter of Johnson et al to accuse anyone of such a thing.

It would be useful to know which law you think is being duplicated.

The issue is that all of us have seen massive fraud committed one way or another by so many very rich and influential people, who have NOT been prosecuted and seem to have got away with it. And we are not talking here about benefit fraud- which is minor in comparison.

Where I agree with GSM, is so many people say that benefit fraud is not important or even relevant. Fraud is fraud- and a fair system should see it stamped out at all levels. However, when you see people like Mone and co - then I can understand that very rich people abusing the system, with the help of mates in Government- then this type of fraud is very much top of the pile.