Thousands of families across the UK have had their child benefit suspended due to a flawed Home Office travel data sharing agreement with HMRC, raising serious concerns about breach of privacy laws. The data watchdog, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), has contacted HMRC over the issues raised, and Liberal Democrat spokesperson for work and pensions, Steve Darling, has described the situation as "unacceptable".
According to experts, the Home Office shared incomplete travel data with HMRC, which was then used by the tax authority to suspend child benefit payments. The error affected passengers who had left and returned through the same airport, including those who had not boarded flights, as well as teachers on school trips and individuals who made one-way bookings.
The ICO has stated that any data-sharing between public bodies must be necessary, proportionate, and carried out in line with data protection law. The watchdog has also highlighted the importance of ensuring that personal data is accurate and fit for purpose, particularly when used to make decisions linked to benefit payments.
However, HMRC has insisted it had done nothing wrong in relation to data laws, citing adherence to the UK GDPR and other legislation. The Home Office has acknowledged that its travel history should be interpreted as an intention to travel, not proof of travel, but critics argue that this caveats do little to address the fundamental issues with the data sharing agreement.
The suspension of child benefit payments has caused significant distress for affected families, who have been left without financial support. HMRC has apologized twice and suspended the practice until it had checked with recipients, but experts are questioning whether this is enough to rectify the situation.
As one expert noted, data protection laws require schemes such as this to demonstrate that use of travel data was necessary and proportionate to the desired outcome. The use of personal data must also be balanced against human rights, particularly in cases where individuals have been detrimentally affected by flawed decision-making.
According to experts, the Home Office shared incomplete travel data with HMRC, which was then used by the tax authority to suspend child benefit payments. The error affected passengers who had left and returned through the same airport, including those who had not boarded flights, as well as teachers on school trips and individuals who made one-way bookings.
The ICO has stated that any data-sharing between public bodies must be necessary, proportionate, and carried out in line with data protection law. The watchdog has also highlighted the importance of ensuring that personal data is accurate and fit for purpose, particularly when used to make decisions linked to benefit payments.
However, HMRC has insisted it had done nothing wrong in relation to data laws, citing adherence to the UK GDPR and other legislation. The Home Office has acknowledged that its travel history should be interpreted as an intention to travel, not proof of travel, but critics argue that this caveats do little to address the fundamental issues with the data sharing agreement.
The suspension of child benefit payments has caused significant distress for affected families, who have been left without financial support. HMRC has apologized twice and suspended the practice until it had checked with recipients, but experts are questioning whether this is enough to rectify the situation.
As one expert noted, data protection laws require schemes such as this to demonstrate that use of travel data was necessary and proportionate to the desired outcome. The use of personal data must also be balanced against human rights, particularly in cases where individuals have been detrimentally affected by flawed decision-making.