Cardiff: Pride Cymru bans political party attendance
Wales' biggest Pride event has banned political party involvement in solidarity with the transgender community. Pride Cymru said this was in "response to community feedback" and a request from the Trans Safety Network to "ensure the safety" of attendees in Cardiff. Earlier this week, Birmingham, Brighton, London and Manchester Prides announced that political parties would not be welcome at their events in an official capacity until they demonstrated a "tangible commitment to trans rights".The announcement comes after the Supreme Court ruled that the term "woman" in the Equality Act was defined by biological sex.
The ruling was welcomed by some campaigners representing lesbian, gay and bisexual people who say it protects single-sex groups, while others shared concerns about the impact on the trans community.Pride Cymru said individuals who belong to political parties can attend the event on 21 and 22 June, but not as representatives.In an open letter urging organisers to ban political involvement, the Trans Safety Network said: "Our trans, non-binary and intersex communities are under an ideological attack right now. Politicians are openly debating how to remove our basic human rights."Pride is and always has been a protest. It is a chance for all members of the LGBTQIA+ community to show solidarity."
The recent Supreme Court ruling clarified existing equality laws, and means that the term "woman" in the Equality Act refers solely to biological women.The legal dispute began in 2018, when the Scottish Parliament passed a bill designed to ensure gender balance on public sector boards.For Women Scotland complained that ministers had included transgender people as part of the quotas in that law.After the ruling they said women could "now feel safe that services and spaces designated for women are for women".The ruling was also welcomed by some other gender critical groups including Scottish Lesbians, which describes itself as a grassroots campaigning organisation with around 70 members, made up of "lesbians of all ages across Scotland."Directors of the group, which made submissions to the Supreme Court in the case, told the BBC: "The Supreme Court decision, which was a clarification of existing law, protects the rights of lesbians as same-sex attracted women."As lesbians we're very relieved that our rights have been protected, and disappointed that Pride has once again abandoned lesbians."Some UK organisations - including in sport and politics - have changed or updated their policies around single-sex teams and spaces such as toilets and changing rooms in response to the ruling.The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which enforces equalities law and provides guidance to policymakers, issued interim guidance for service providers which said access to such spaces must be based on biological sex.The EHRC said the impact of the ruling was that "if somebody identifies as trans, they do not change sex for the purposes of the [Equality] Act, even if they have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC)".In this respect, the EHRC says, "a trans woman is a biological man" and "a trans man is a biological woman".As part of the judgement, Supreme Court judge Lord Hodge stressed that the law still gave protection against discrimination to transgender people.
The four Pride groups which took the decision to exclude political parties represent some of the most popular Pride groups in the UK, with a combined average attendance of over one million people.A statement from the group of Pride organisers said there was a "disturbing global trend... where LGBTQ+ rights are being systematically rolled back".It said the Supreme Court ruling "underscores the urgent need for immediate action", adding that the move to suspend political party participation was a "refusal to platform those who have not protected our rights".The groups have called for "full and enforceable protections under the Equality Act", "timely and dignified access to NHS gender-affirming healthcare", a reform of the gender recognition certificate process and "sustainable funding for trans-led services and support organisations across the UK".Birmingham Pride had already announced its own ban on some political parties, as had Belfast and Southampton Pride events. Glasgow Pride has also banned political parties from this year's festival.
Political parties are often involved in marches and demonstrations at Pride, often with notable politicians using the opportunity to share their parties' beliefs around LGBT+ issues.Mark Drakeford and Vaughan Gething have previously attended Cardiff Pride in a political capacity. Sir Keir Starmer, Sir Ed Davey, Carla Denyer and Boris Johnson have also all previously publicly attended Pride marches.A spokesperson for LGBT+ Lib Dems said the group was "sickened to our core" at the ban, and accused Pride organisers of creating a "blanket suspension" which was "lumping them in" with other political parties.They told the BBC: "We look forward to a constructive dialogue with Pride organisers so we can come back bigger and better."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
34 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The British military base preparing for war in space
In a fake village in Buckinghamshire, several members of Space Command are huddled around a computer screen watching a foreign missile approach to a Ministry of Defence communications satellite. It is just an exercise, but it is a scenario that is increasingly worrying military chiefs, who fear space is now the most important theatre of war. Modern life is largely space-based, with satellites controlling everything from EasyJet flight plans to Amazon deliveries and army advances. Taking out satellites would cripple society. Russia took down the country's satellite communications just hours before it began the land invasion. China and Russia have also both tested anti-satellite missiles, while Moscow is allegedly developing a programme to arm some of its satellites with nuclear warheads, meaning it could destroy enemy networks while in orbit. In recognition of this new orbital battlefield, Space Command was established at RAF High Wycombe in 2021, to 'protect and defend' UK interests in space, and is now home to the UK Space Operations Centre, which was officially opened by government ministers this week. The RAF base is the former headquarters of Bomber Command, a military unit responsible for strategic bombing during the Second World War. With its winding streets, faux church towers and manor house office blocks, was designed to look like a quintessential Home Counties village, should the Luftwaffe be passing over. The Bomber Command logo 'Strike Hard, Strike Sure' has been replaced with Space Command's 'Ad Stellas Usque' – Latin for 'up to the stars'. Where Bomber Harris's team had its eyes fixed firmly on the ground, Space Command's gaze is now turned skywards. Maria Eagle, minister for defence procurement, who helped open the operations centre this week, said: 'From a national security point of view, space is a contested and congested and competitive domain, and we need to make sure, as our adversaries advance their capabilities, that we're able to deal with what that throws up.' She added: 'It's an extension of the more earthbound worries that we've got. The usual kind of things that you worry about on Earth, it's just extended upwards, because that's now a domain that is as important as land, sea or air to the potential of war-fighting or defending national security. 'The National Space Operations Centre does vital work in monitoring and protecting our interests. It's a recognition of the fact that our adversaries are active there, and we need to know what's going on.' Although the United States performed the first anti-satellite tests in 1959, space warfare has largely been consigned to Hollywood and science fiction until recently. Fears began to ramp up in January 2007, when China shot down one of its own ageing weather satellites with a ballistic missile creating a cloud of space junk, which is still causing problems. In November 2021, Russia conducted its own direct-ascent anti-satellite test, destroying the Soviet intelligence satellite Kosmos-1408, and generating a debris field that forced astronauts on the International Space Station to take shelter. However it is not just anti-satellite missiles that are causing concern. According to the latest Space Threat Assessment, from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, nations are developing evermore elaborate space weapons. These weapons include electro-magnetic pulses, microwaves and lasers to fry electronics, dazzlers to blind optical sensors, and grapplers to latch on to satellites and pull them out of orbit. China, Russia, Iran and North Korea all have the capability of jamming and hijacking satellite signals and launching cyber attacks. A 10-second delay in Google Chrome loading may seem like a domestic internet glitch, but bad actors could also be behind it, Space Command has warned. 'Counter-space arsenal' Space Command is particularly worried about China, which in the past year has launched increasingly advanced and highly-manoeuvrable satellites for purposes that remain unclear. CSIS believes Beijing may be creating a ' formidable on-orbit counter-space arsenal ' and that manoeuvrability testing is allowing Chinese operators to develop 'tactics and procedures that can be used for space war-fighting'. US Space force commanders have also warned that Chinese satellites have been spotted 'dogfighting' in space, moving within less than a mile of each other. 'China continues to develop and field a broad set of counter-space capabilities,' a member of Space Command told The Telegraph. 'It's certainly one of the more capable adversaries. Space is no longer a sanctuary, it's a space of contest. It's the modern battlefield.' Russia's Luch satellites have also been spotted stalking European communications and broadcast satellites, moving close to their orbits for reasons not fully understood. Space Command fears they are probing the systems to find out how best to disrupt signals. Although Russia continues to deny it is developing an orbital nuclear anti-satellite weapon – which would breach the 1967 Outer Space Treaty – US intelligence suggests otherwise. Chris Bryant, minister of state for data protection and telecoms, said: 'There's a lot of stuff up there now … and the risks from deliberate bad actors, in particular from Russia and China, and the havoc that could be created either deliberately or accidentally, is quite significant. 'So we need to monitor as closely as we possibly can, 24/7, everything that is going on up there so that we can avert accidental damage, and we can also potentially deter other more deliberate, harmful activity.' Space Command currently employs more than 600 staff, roughly 70 per cent of whom are from the Royal Air Force with the remaining 30 per cent from the Army and Navy, plus a handful of civilians. Not only is it monitoring the sky for threats from foreign powers but it is also keeping an eye out for falling space debris, asteroids, and coronal mass ejections from the Sun which could wipe out power grids and satellites. When a threat is spotted, the team can contact satellite providers to warn them to reposition their spacecraft, or advise them to power down until a powerful jet of plasma has passed through. It also informs the government and the security services on the orbital movements of foreign powers. Space Command also launched its first military satellite last year, named Tyche, which can capture daytime images and videos of the Earth's surface for surveillance, intelligence gathering and military operations. It is part of the Government's £968 million Istari programme which will see more satellites launched by 2031 to create a surveillance constellation. Mr Bryant added: 'Lots of people think 'space' and joke about Star Trek and the final frontier, but actually the truth is you couldn't spend a single day of your life these days in the UK without some kind of engagement with space. 'The havoc that could be created, which might be military havoc, or it might be entirely civil havoc, could be very significant.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
As a generation of gay and lesbian people ages, memories of worse — and better — times swirl
David Perry recalls being young and gay in 1980s Washington D.C. and having 'an absolute blast.' He was fresh out of college, raised in Richmond, Virginia, and had long viewed the nation's capital as 'the big city' where he could finally embrace his true self. He came out of the closet here, got a job at the National Endowment for the Arts where his boss was a gay Republican, and 'lost my virginity in D.C. on August 27, 1980,' he says, chuckling. The bars and clubs were packed with gay men and women — Republican and Democrat — and almost all of them deep in the closet. 'There were a lot of gay men in D.C., and they all seemed to work for the White House or members of Congress. It was kind of a joke. This was pre-Internet, pre-Facebook, pre-all of that. So people could be kind of on the down-low. You would run into congresspeople at the bar,' Perry says. 'The closet was pretty transparent. It's just that no one talked about it.' He also remembers a billboard near the Dupont Circle Metro station with a counter ticking off the total number of of AIDS deaths in the District of Columbia. 'I remember when the number was three,' says Perry, 63. Now Perry, a public relations professional in San Francisco, is part of a generation that can find itself overshadowed amidst the after-parties and DJ sets of World Pride, which wraps up this weekend with a two-day block party on Pennsylvania Avenue. Advocates warn of a quiet crisis among retirement-age LGBTQ+ people and a community at risk of becoming marginalized inside their own community. 'It's really easy for Pride to be about young people and parties,' says Sophie Fisher, LGBTQ program coordinator for Seabury Resources for Aging, a company that runs queer-friendly retirement homes and assisted-living facilities and which organized a pair of Silver Pride events last month for LGBTQ+ people over age 55. These were 'the first people through the wall' in the battle for gay rights and protections, Fisher says. Now, 'they kind of get swept under the rug.' Loneliness and isolation The challenges and obstacles for elderly LGBTQ+ people can be daunting. 'We're a society that really values youth as is. When you throw in LGBTQ on top of that, it's a double whammy,' says Christina Da Costa of the group SAGE — Services and Advocacy for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Elders. 'When you combine so many factors, you have a population that's a lot less likely to thrive than their younger brethren.' Older LGBTQ+ people are far more likely to have no contact with their family and less likely to have children to help care for them, Da Costa says. Gay men over 60 are the precise generation that saw their peer group decimated by AIDS. The result: chronic loneliness and isolation. 'As you age, it becomes difficult to find your peer group because you don't go out to bars anymore,' says Yvonne Smith, a 73-year-old D.C. resident who moved to Washington at age 14. 'There are people isolated and alone out there.' These seniors are also often poorer than their younger brethren. Many were kicked out of the house the moment they came out of the closet, and being openly queer or nonbinary could make you unemployable or vulnerable to firing deep into the 1990s. 'You didn't want to be coming out of a gay bar, see one of your co-workers or one of your students,' Smith says. ' People were afraid that if it was known you were gay, they would lose their security clearance or not be hired at all.' In April, founders cut the ribbon on Mary's House, a new 15-unit living facility for LGBTQ+ seniors in southeast Washington. These kind of inclusive senior-care centers are becoming an increasing priority for LGBTQ+ elders. Rayceen Pendarvis, a D.C. queer icon, performer and presenter, says older community members who enter retirement homes or assisted-living centers can face social isolation or hostility from judgmental residents. 'As we age, we lose our peers. We lose our loved ones and some of us no longer have the ability to maintain our homes,' says Pendarvis, who identifies as 'two-spirit' and eschews all pronouns. 'Sometimes they go in, and they go back into the closet. It's very painful for some.' A generation gap Perry and others see a clear divide between their generation and the younger LGBTQ+ crowd. Younger people, Perry says, drink and smoke a lot less and do much less bar-hopping in the dating-app age. Others can't help but gripe a bit about how these youngsters don't know how good they have it. 'They take all these protections for granted,' Smith says. The younger generation 'got comfortable,' Pendarvis says, and sometimes doesn't fully understand the multigenerational fight that came before. 'We had to fight to get the rights that we have today,' Pendarvis said. 'We fought for a place at the table. We CREATED the table!' Now that fight is on again as President Donald Trump's administration sets the community on edge with an open culture war targeting trans protections and drag shows, and enforcing a binary view of gender identity. The struggle against that campaign may be complicated by a quiet reality inside the LGBTQ+ community: These issues remain a topic of controversy among some LGBTQ+ seniors. Perry said he has observed that some older lesbians remain leery of trans women; likewise, he said, some older gay men are leery of the drag-queen phenomenon. 'There is a good deal of generational sensitivity that needs to be practiced by our older gay brethren,' he says. 'The gender fluidity that has come about in the last 15 years, I would be lying if I said I didn't have to adjust my understanding of it sometimes.' Despite the internal complexities, many are hoping to see a renewed sense of militancy and street politics in the younger LGBTQ+ generation. Sunday's rally and March for Freedom, starting at the Lincoln Memorial, is expected to be particularly defiant given the 2025 context. 'I think we're going to see a whole new era of activism,' Perry says. 'I think we will find our spine and our walking shoes – maybe orthopedic – and protest again. But I really hope that the younger generation helps us pick up this torch.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
How benefits fraud exploded – and milking the system went mainstream
Sara Morris, a 50-year-old from Stone, Staffordshire, is not the first middle-aged jogger to showcase their exploits on social media. In posts on Facebook, the mother-of-three – and member of the Stone Master Marathoners – advertised her exertions in scores of running events, including 5k and 10k races. The difference for Morris was that rather than just showing off, her posts betrayed her as a benefits cheat. In 2005 she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, but in 2020 she exaggerated the extent of her condition to claim Personal Independence Payment (PIP). She claimed that she could not stand at her cooker or get out of the bath, and that she was so anxious she ended up in tears when she went to the pharmacy to collect her medication. She did not mention long-distance running. At Stoke Crown Court last July, Morris was sentenced to eight months in prison for dishonestly making a false statement to obtain a benefit, having been overpaid £20,528.83 between October 20 2020 and April 25 2023. Between May 2019 and December 2022, an investigation found that she competed in 73 races. She accepted that her benefit application 'crossed over into the realms of dishonesty'. She served nine weeks. Last week, in a proceeds of crime hearing, in the same court Judge Graeme Smith ordered Morris to repay £22,386.02 within 28 days or serve nine months in prison in default. Benefit fraud remains stubbornly high since the pandemic Morris's case is so blatant as to verge on the comic. But Keir Starmer will not laugh at the timing of the hearing, in a week when he has faced calls for higher spending and warnings of lower growth. On Monday, the Prime Minister revealed the results of Lord Robertson's Strategic Defence Review, which included a pledge to build up to 12 new attack submarines and increase defence spending from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent of national income. He had barely finished the announcement when it was reported that Nato would oblige him to commit to increasing defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2035. On Thursday US defence secretary Pete Hegseth pushed for five per cent. Meanwhile, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development predicted that the UK economic growth would slump to a measly one per cent next year, hit by uncertainty over Donald Trump's tariffs regime and higher-than-expected inflation. Even if Starmer manages to reform the welfare system, as he has promised – and his handbrake U-turn on winter fuel payments suggest this will be easier said than done – it appears inevitable he will have to put up taxes, too. It's never a popular decision, and especially not when there is a perception among the vast majority that criminals and scammers are fleecing honest taxpayers. And that perception is borne out by the statistics: benefit fraud has remained stubbornly high since the pandemic, while convictions for the crime have fallen. Telegraph analysis of Ministry of Justice data shows that the number of people sentenced for key benefit fraud-related offences has plummeted from 4,154 to 685 since 2017. Such is public concern that Britons overestimate the true extent of benefit fraud. 'We find that the public estimate that about 24 per cent of the entire welfare budget is being fraudulently claimed, whereas the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) estimate 2.2 per cent of benefit expenditure is 'over paid',' says Ben Page, CEO of Ipsos. Yet in a department as large as the DWP, even a small percentage can mean a huge loss. In its report last year, the DWP reported a top-line figure that 2.8 per cent of its £268 billion total benefits outlay (which includes around £160 billion on pensions, less susceptible to fraud), or £7.4 billion, was lost to fraud. This year fraud was down to 2.2 per cent, or £6.5 billion – a sum that has more than doubled since 2020 – with a further £1.9 billion on claimant error and £1 billion official error. If fraud was its own block of spending, it would be not far from how much the government spends on the entire legal system (£8.6 billion), and more than higher education (£7.2 billion), foreign aid (£7.2 billion) and potholes (£7 billion). It would be enough to buy you a Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier with change for 11 F-35s to put on it. A 1p cut in income tax would cost just £6.4 billion. There were 7.5 million people on Universal Credit in January 2025, up from 6.4 million people on Universal Credit in January 2024. The most recent data show that there were 39,000 new 'starts' – people receiving benefit – per week in that month from 47,000 claims, implying an acceptance rate of 83 per cent. High profile fraud cases, even if they represent a minority of claimants, are infuriating for the rule-abiding public and toxic for government. Sara Morris's was not the only recent case to make headlines. Last May, three women and two men from a Bulgarian crime gang were jailed for between three and eight years each for a £50 million benefits fraud, the biggest in British history, which involved thousands of fraudulent claims. Sentencing Gyunesh Ali, one of the gang members, Judge David Aaronberg said Ali had committed fraud 'on an industrial scale'. In December, Halton council announced it would have to write off more than £240,000 of unpaid welfare fraud debt owed by Christina Pomfrey, a Runcorn grandmother, after her death. Pomfrey had received more than £1 million in benefits over a 15-year period, having lied that her MS had left her blind and in need of a wheelchair, before she was arrested. In 2020 she was sentenced to three years and eight months, after what the judge called 'staggering' dishonesty and 'determined benefit fraud on a substantial scale'. In October 2023, Hossein Ali Najafi, 57, who was born in Iran, was sentenced to 29 months in prison for falsely claiming £349,000 in benefits, using two identities and 26 bank accounts. 'Fraudsters like Hossein Ali Najafi abuse the benefits system, which exists to support people who are in genuine need,' said Maqsood Khan, senior crown prosecutor of Mersey Cheshire Fraud Unit. Gaming the system And so on and on. Benefit fraud has rocketed in recent times. A State of the Nation report commissioned by David Cameron's government in 2010 estimated the total fraud to be £1 billion. In 2011/12, the DWP estimated that fraud was worth 0.7 per cent of the total budget. (The government's counting method changed after 2018.) The figures rocketed up during the pandemic, particularly in Universal Credit. According to the National Audit Office's analysis of the DWP data, the Universal Credit overpayments due to fraud and error went from £700 million in 2018-2019 to £1.7 billion the following year and a whopping £5.5 billion the year by 2020-2021. Last year's record figure for Universal Credit fraud was £6.5 billion. Fraud in other areas, such as housing benefit, meanwhile, remained stable or fell over the same period. State pension fraud is extremely low, with less than 0.1 per cent overpaid due to fraud or error. The fraud rate in Universal Credit amounts to around 10 per cent of the overall Universal Credit spending; bearing in mind this only registers the fraud that has been caught, the true figure may be higher still. That's not counting the men and women – perhaps following tips gleaned from a 'sickfluencer' – who are gaming the system but technically within the letter of it. It has been argued that one factor in the shocking rise in Universal Credit fraud has been the move away from in-person assessments to remote ones, often conducted over the phone. Last year Peter Schofield, the DWP permanent secretary, blamed the 'underlying growth of fraud in the economy' for the increase. Reporting on the 2024 figures, the National Audit Office's Gareth Davies said it was clear the DWP 'no longer expects Universal Credit fraud and error to return to the levels seen before the significant increase during the Covid-19 pandemic'. A DWP spokesperson told The Telegraph: 'We are bringing forward the biggest fraud crackdown in a generation, as part of wider plans that will save £9.6 billion by 2030. 'Thanks to our efforts we have reduced fraud by around £800 million – with over £400 million of savings in Universal Credit alone in the last year. We are absolutely clear we will not tolerate any waste as we protect taxpayer's money.' Joe Shalam, the policy director of the Centre for Social Justice, a think tank, who previously worked at the DWP, believes that there has been a cultural shift in recent years towards seeking out benefits. 'The rise in benefit fraud is analogous to the rise in shoplifting,' he says. 'A population-level change driven by wider economic forces, like inflation and the cost of living. Such casual lawbreaking was highlighted last week when Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary and putative successor to Kemi Badenoch as Conservative leader, released a widely-shared film in which he confronted some of the passengers on the Tube, thought to be as many as one in 25 of the total, who push through the barriers without paying. Corroding faith in government But there is a cultural dimension to it as well. The welfare system has an implicit or assumed sense that everyone who is 'entitled' will not necessarily apply for it. We're seeing a cultural shift where people are much more likely to say 'my neighbour is receiving X, why am I not?' says Shalam. 'There are some cultural and economic factors that make it harder to get back to a pre-pandemic norm.' In March, for example, it was reported that the Motability scheme, which provides taxpayer-funded cars to those claiming PIP benefits, had signed up 815,000 people last year, an increase of more than 170,000 in a year. Claimants can apply for a new model every three years. The Motability fleet is the biggest in Europe, valued at more than £14 billion. On social media, there are accounts dedicated to showing their followers how they can secure a car for themselves, too. All of which can corrode faith in government, says James Frayne, a veteran political strategist. 'Since the late 2000s, when everyone had to tighten their belts, there has been increasing exasperation that some people are wrongly living off the fat of the land by claiming benefits they aren't due,' he says. 'While people get angry at cases of systematic criminal fraud, they can get just as angry at individuals they think just can't be bothered to work. It all adds up to this sense that nobody seems to be able to govern Britain properly. Inevitably, the anger at those milking or ripping off the system rebounds towards politicians.' Soon after winning the general election last year, Keir Starmer announced that cracking down on benefit fraud would be a priority for his government. In his speech to the Labour Party conference in September, he said that new legislation, following a policy mooted by the Conservatives, would let investigators 'root out' fraud with similar powers of 'search and seizure' to those enjoyed by HMRC. This would compel banks to hand over financial information about their customers where there was reasonable suspicion of benefit fraud. The plan was designed to save the taxpayer £1.6 billion over five years and free up more money for public services. Another proposal, announced in January, was to strip benefit fraudsters of their driving licences. Starmer's reforms have met with resistance. Neil Duncan-Jordan, who was elected the Labour MP for Poole last year, has proposed amendments to the bill that would ensure only those suspected of fraud would be surveilled. Writing in The Guardian, Duncan accused Starmer of 'resurrecting Tory proposals for mass spying on people who receive state support' and that under the proposed legislation 'welfare recipients would be treated as suspects, simply because they need support from the state'. The vast sums of money lost to benefit fraud are also an incentive for a government to crack down on it, to free up money for other projects. Recent comparative international studies are thin on the ground, but Britain might learn from Finland, a high-trust society with a relatively simple benefits system and high rates of digitisation, where fraud rates amount to less than half a percentage point of the total paid. According to the latest report by Kela, the Finnish welfare institution, there were 1,104 suspected cases of benefit 'misuse' in 2024, amounting to €7.2 million (£6 million); the number of cases has been stable over the past five years. In the UK, failing a cultural reversion away from seeking out every benefit you might be entitled to, Shalam believes technology might improve efficiency. 'Analysing and assessing all the information about people's claims and their condition takes a huge volume of human resource,' he says. 'There's a lot of potential in AI to crack down on fraud and make sure the system is going to those who need it most.' Ultimately the people most angry about benefit fraud are those working on the front lines, says Amber Rudd, who was secretary of state for work and pensions from 2018-2019. 'The people who mind most about [fraud] are the people who work in the job centres,' she says. 'They find it really upsetting and frustrating. They are trying to help other people. When I went round the job centres it was the first thing they wanted to talk about. Fraud takes many different forms. The abusive form, forcing single mothers to go in and apply, then there are the multiple frauds where someone has a system. 'It's like the bank robber who says he robs banks because 'that's where the money is'. There's money being handed out; there is inevitably going to be fraud. I thought at the time we could do better with technology trying to weed it out. But it's going to be a constant battle.' In attempting to mitigate Sara Morris's sentence, her lawyer Paul Cliff conceded that her application to the DWP 'did not give the full picture,' but that 'running was one of the ways she tried to manage her MS'. 'She lost her home because of financial problems,' he also said. 'And was struggling to keep her head above water financially.' As he tries to placate an increasingly angry electorate while balancing Britain's precarious books, Keir Starmer may sympathise with her.
