Tony Blair thinks the DWP could be automated by AI. Here’s why that’s so dangerous

In the course of a parliament that was littered with authoritarian threats, victories for human rights and civil liberties were not easy to come by. But earlier this year a coalition of human rights organisations and groups representing disabled people, the elderly and some of the most vulnerable in our society, including the Big Issue Group, roundly defeated the previous government over proposals to scan the nation’s bank accounts under the premise of tackling fraud and error in the welfare system.

These proposals, which would have hit many vulnerable groups the hardest, should be buried for good. Yet, in a recent interview, former prime minister Tony Blair has championed the potential of AI to revolutionise government operations, suggesting that 40% of tasks in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) could be automated in proposals that sound disconcertingly reminiscent of those that were previously scrapped.

There is a very real danger that AI systems, those akin to the previous government’s proposed welfare bank spying powers, could facilitate mass surveillance, leading to intrusive scrutiny of people’s lives. The right to privacy and the dignity of those in the welfare system cannot be sacrificed on the altar of supposed efficiency. 

• How AI might accelerate the onset of a universal basic income
• DWP ramps up AI use to ‘bring the future to the welfare system’ and push people into work

Blair’s comments reveal a concerning oversimplification of what AI could – and should – be used for when it comes to the delivery of the core functions of the state. Reducing government to mere processes risks overlooking the human element that is central to public service.

It’s not just about ticking boxes or speeding up tasks – it’s about understanding and addressing the complex needs of real people. The dangers of using AI at scale are even more alarming in high-risk environments like the welfare system, where mistakes can determine whether claimants can afford to feed themselves, heat their houses, or pay for essential medication.

Blindly embracing AI is dangerous, particularly when we consider the track record of automated systems in similar contexts.  The systems used in the course of the Horizon scandal led to wrongful accusations against postmasters, many of whom were financially ruined and criminalised. A recent investigation found that 200,000 people have been wrongfully investigated for housing benefit fraud and error, all because of poor algorithmic judgment.

The “Robodebt” scandal in Australia is also pertinent, as a faulty automated system incorrectly demanded benefit repayments from over half a million welfare recipients. We fail to take lessons from these examples at our peril.

None of this factors in the potential job losses within DWP if 40% of tasks are automated. The livelihoods of civil servants may not be of central concern to the public but taking human beings out of the delivery of services will have a bearing on those who receive them.

Whilst advocating for the use of AI to cut jobs at the DWP, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change’s recent paper also calls for more people to enter the workforce. This contradiction is not just deeply ironi – it’s symbolic of the wider disconnect between those advocating for sweeping technological changes, outsourcing work to machines, and the real consequences those changes can have.

In response to Blair’s push to supercharge AI within the DWP, 13 groups from across the NGO sector have come together in an open letter to urge caution against reckless techno-optimism. The signatories, representing a broad range of human rights, digital rights, disability rights, and anti-poverty organisations, highlight the serious risks AI poses in welfare – from mass surveillance and data exploitation to subjecting vulnerable people to the flaws and failures of unreliable algorithms.

The letter acknowledges the role that cutting edge technologies have in our future but delivers a sharp warning against “magical thinking” when applying AI to complex systems. At this scale, mistakes are almost inevitable – and when they happen, it’s the most vulnerable who will pay the price. Their message is clear: the potential dangers of AI in such a critical system far outweigh promises of efficiency.

With welfare claimants already grappling with long waittimes and wrongful fraud accusations, it is clear that DWP is facing serious operational challenges. However, automation won’t fix the deep-rooted issues that leads to these kinds of failings. When these systems go wrong, as they almost certainly always do, it will be people who are disabled, poor, and sick that find themselves on the wrong side of the algorithm.

Susannah Copson is legal and policy officer at Big Brother Watch.

Do you have a story to tell or opinions to share about this? Get in touch and tell us more. Big Issue exists to give homeless and marginalised people the opportunity to earn an income. To support our work buy a copy of the magazine or get the app from the App Store or Google Play.