Clampdown on 'benefit tourism' hits Britons

Welfare rights: Residence test attacked as unfair and unwieldy

NICHOLAS TIMMINS

Public Policy Editor

Social security changes aimed at clamping down on "benefit tourism" have resulted in thousands of British citizens being denied benefit. They should be scrapped, the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux said yesterday.

In an unusually outspoken report, the CABs say the scheme has backfired, creating a class of people able to live freely and work in the United Kingdom but who are denied access to the welfare system.

The "habitual residence test" has saved pounds 28m in its first year - far more than the Government anticipated. More than 27,750 people, five times more than expected and one-fifth of them British citizens, failed the test which costs pounds 3.4m to run - 10 times more than expected. In addition, there has been the cost of thousands of appeals.

But it has left penniless people who "by no stretch of the imagination are benefit tourists", the association said. They have had to rely on friends, relatives and charities, while some have ended up sleeping rough.

After 18 months, the test "has proved expensive, unfair and unworkable and has no part in a humane welfare system".

The policy was announced by Peter Lilley, Secretary of State for Social Security, at the Conservative Party conference in 1993 when he said European Community rules had created a "crooks' tour" for scroungers which led to EC nationals to demand "Ou est le bureau de change?" - or "Where can I cash my benefit cheque?".

But "what was devised as a measure to crack down on Europeans having holidays at the taxpayer's expense has in practice turned into something wholly different", the national association said. The safety net has been withdrawn from citizens now considered to be "outside society" because they have been abroad.

Black and Asian Britons who have gone overseas to work or care for elderly relatives have borne the brunt of the test, being "penalised for travelling to maintain family links overseas".

Others who have worked in the European Union have found themselves refused benefit on their return. Many of the decisions are being overturned on appeal, NACAB said, a sign of inconsistent decision-taking around rules whose interpretation provide "immense scope" for disagreement. Appeals are taking months, leaving people with with no income.

Hugh Sweeney, 39, a sheet metal worker, who returned to the UK last December after unemployment forced him to move to Australia two and a half years earlier, claims he has been left penniless because according to the Department of Social Security he had failed the "habitual residence" test.

His wife and daughter had failed to settle in Australia and a neck injury means he can only do light work, but not practise his trade. While abroad he had kept his home in Newport Pagnell, Buckinghamshire, paid his mortgage, council tax insurance and water rates. But now with most of his money taken up with paying the costs of returning home he is living on hand- outs from his 70-year-old mother-in-law and cash help from his builder brother.

However, the DSS insisted that ministers remained "happy with the test".

Other cases that NACAB cites include:

t A man of Pakistani origin who fought in the British Army in the Second World War and had worked in the Yorkshire woollen industry for 31 years but who was refused benefit on his return from abroad.

t A lone parent officially recognised as settled in Britain went abroad for six months after 11 years living here to attempt to negotiate the release of her husband from his Middle East country of origin. She was refused benefit on her return. Her child was at school here and she was a school governor.

t A British citizen, originally from Nigeria, who had worked for the NHS since 1965 was refused benefit to top up her retirement pension after athree-month visit to Nigeria. She won her case on appeal.

Cases the Independent has reported include a 19-year-old British-born pregnant woman who fled Nigeria to escape domestic violence who became destitute, surviving on food given by fellow hostel residents and an NHS handout as her baby was born. She won her appeal after five penniless months.

BBC-TV's Here and Now tomorrow cites the case of Caroline Brook-Boysen, a divorced mother-of-three, who taught English in Brussels but has now moved to Paris where she can claim pounds 300-a-month benefit.

9 Failing the Test, NACAB, London N1 9LZ; pounds 7.