← Back to Events

DWP drops lie detector software

The decision not to continue using voice risk analysis (VRA) software to catch benefit fraudsters, was taken after trials found that the technology was not sufficiently reliable, reports The Guardian . Plans to install lie detectors were hailed as a move to get tough on benefit cheats when they were unveiled by the former prime minister, Gordon Brown, on the eve of the Queen's speech in December 2008. Ministers hoped the technology would make the benefits system more efficient and less costly. VRA is meant to detect signs of stress in a caller's voice by analysing short snippets of speech, but critics say the system is not powerful enough to distinguish cheats from honest callers. In 23 pilot studies, local authorities used the VRA software to analyse phone calls from people applying for, or updating existing claims for, housing benefit, council tax, income support and jobseeker's allowance. The technology was judged a success in only five of the trials. A spokesperson for the DWP said: "We have got the analysis back and have been going through whether it works when applied to the benefits system. This is the first time it has been used in the benefits system and the decision is that it is not very good value for money." The DWP organised two groups of trials. The first, in 2008, cost £460,000 and involved six local authorities and Jobcentre Plus. The second phase trial was expanded to 24 local authorities at a cost of £1.7m. Information from 45,000 calls was included in the evaluation, the department said. Nine local authorities trialled the software on calls about new benefit claims. Of these, only three said it worked well enough to highlight risky callers without raising too many false alarms. Of 12 local authorities who used VRA to spot cheats during benefit reviews, only one judged the trial to have been a success.

Source: The Guardian ↗

Market Reactions

Price reaction data not yet calculated.

Available after full seed + reaction pipeline runs.

Similar Historical Events

No strong historical parallels found (score < 0.65).