The Government is working closely with industry, civil society and international partners to do what is necessary to prevent the use of online disinformation to undermine our democratic values and processes. Ministers and officials have regular meetings with social media companies on countering disinformation, including during elections. We welcome the measures taken by these companies to tackle the spread of disinformation and harmful content on their platforms but recognise that more needs to be done.

The Department takes its obligation to prevent, detect and investigate fraud very seriously and will investigate all claims where fraud may have been committed. We have recently set up a dedicated team to investigate a specific type of emergent fraud, and we are also committed to the use of penalties such as prosecutions and tough financial penalties to discourage fraudulent behaviour.

The Department has also recently been working to further improve knowledge and awareness of Universal Credit (UC) fraud amongst Jobcentre and Service Centre staff. Guidance has also been issued to ensure that all staff are aware how to quickly refer cases of suspected fraud to the Department’s Counter-fraud team.

Most welfare losses, across Government, arise from claimants failing to report changes of circumstances. UC provides a single, digital interface through which claimants can more easily report these changes. UC also allows us to adjust benefit entitlement in line with changing circumstances in real time. Internal and external data matches are increasingly helping to inform benefit payments and alerting staff to check for any undeclared changes in people’s circumstances. Once UC is fully rolled out, we expect cross-welfare losses to fraud, error and overpayments to be reduced by around £1 billion per year

As of June 2019, potential fraudulent advance claims equate to less than 1 per cent of all Universal Credit claims.

The Department takes benefit fraud very seriously and is committed to taking appropriate action when it is detected.

If a claimant has been the victim of fraud, and has not benefitted financially in any way, they will not be asked to repay the money. The Department considers all cases on their individual merits and decisions are made on the strength of the evidence provided.

The Department has been working to improve knowledge and awareness of advances fraud amongst Jobcentre and Service Centre staff. Guidance has also been issued to ensure that staff are aware how to refer cases of suspected fraud to the Department’s Counter-fraud team.

Most welfare losses, across Government, arise from claimants failing to report changes of circumstances, Universal Credit (UC) provides a single, digital interface through which claimants can more easily report these changes. As such, once UC is fully rolled out, we expect cross-welfare losses to fraud, error and overpayments to be reduced by around £1 billion per year.

The use of companies that sell bespoke essays to students who pass the work off as their own undermines the reputation of the education system in this country, and devalues the hard work of those succeeding on their own merit.

The government has a clear expectation that educational institutions do everything in their power to prevent students being tempted by these companies. In a university context that may be through introducing initiatives such as honour codes, and making sure their students are aware of the severe consequences they face if they are caught cheating.

In addition, the department will be publishing an Education Technology strategy in the spring which will include encouraging technology companies to identify how anti-cheating software can tackle the growth of essay mills and stay one step ahead of the cheats.

The government is supporting the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) to put pressure on technology companies who readily facilitate the use of essay mills. This supports and furthers the 2017 efforts of the QAA and National Union of Students and Universities UK who responded to the government’s request to develop guidance for higher education providers on how to combat the threat of “contract cheating”.

The Office for Students is the independent regulator of higher education in England. Through the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, the government has given the Office for Students the power to take action if higher education providers are found to be, in any way, complicit in cheating. This includes imposing fines or ultimately de-registration, the highest possible punishment. The government remains open to the future need for additional legislation, and will continue to investigate all options available.

The Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) is the independent regulator of qualifications in England for secondary school pupils. In reformed GCSEs, AS and A levels Ofqual have significantly reduced the use of non-exam assessment - primarily permitting it only where the prescribed subject content cannot be assessed within an examination. This means that - in most subjects - a pupil could not use an essay writing service to gain an unfair advantage in an assessment.

In all GCSEs, AS and A levels, Ofqual rules require exam boards to do all they can to prevent malpractice and maladministration when developing, delivering and awarding regulated qualifications, to investigate allegations and suspicions of malpractice when they arise and to impose appropriate sanctions when malpractice is confirmed.

Whilst we have no seen evidence of successful interference, we are not complacent: this Government takes the security and integrity of our electoral processes extremely seriously. The Government is committed to working together with a full range of partners: academia, businesses, charities, regulators and civil society to respect, protect, and promote our democracy.

Protecting the UK’s electoral mechanics from foreign cyber interference is one of the National Cyber Security Centre’s key priorities. The NCSC offers political parties access to the best cyber security guidance and support, and will provide cyber security guidance to the range of bodies – notably local authorities – involved in an election.

It is also the responsibility of organisations and individuals to do what they can to reduce the vulnerability of data, which is the most effective method to deny states and others the opportunity to do harm or interfere. This is why we have spent £1.9 billion on cyber security, including establishing the NCSC since 2016.

There is also ongoing work with local authorities and electoral administrators to ensure our elections remain secure. Within these broad programmes of work to secure our democratic processes, costs specifically to secure elections from outside interference are not recorded separately.

The Government takes fraud very seriously and is determined to make it more difficult for fraudsters to operate.

The independent financial services regulator – the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) – requires banks to maintain effective systems and controls to prevent the risk that they might be used to further financial crime. This includes controls to prevent fraud. Under the Money Laundering Regulations firms must carry out customer due diligence measures to identify customers and check that they are who they say they are. If the FCA found evidence that a regulated firm did not undertake appropriate due diligence checks, that firm would be in breach of the Money Laundering Regulations and the FCA could consider what regulatory tools might be appropriate under such circumstances.

The Government also supports the work that the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) is driving forward, in conjunction with industry, consumer groups and other regulatory and Government bodies, to tackle Authorised Push Payment scams, in which individuals are tricked into sending money online. In April this year, the PSR established a Steering Group of financial institutions and consumer representatives to develop an industry code to help prevent these kinds of scams. In September, the Steering Group published the draft code for consultation and intends to finalise the code in early 2019.

It is also important that victims of fraud are provided with adequate support, and that the public is equipped with the information they need to spot a scam and stand up to fraudsters. That’s why the Government has invested in a new IT system for Action Fraud, which is the UK’s national reporting point for fraud and cybercrime. This new system will deliver significant improvements, both for victims reporting fraud and cybercrimes, and for law enforcement in investigating these crimes.

The banking industry has also taken important steps to prevent fraud, including through the Banking Protocol - a rapid response scheme through which branch staff can alert police and Trading Standards to suspected frauds taking place. The system is now operational in every police force area and in the first six months of this year prevented £14.6 million in fraud and led to 100 arrests.

No figures are available for the number of victims of, or for the average loss incurred from, personal injury fraud. Across all forms of insurance the ABI estimates that fraud adds, on average, an extra £50 a year to the annual insurance bill for every UK policyholder.

However, we have already seen a fall in premiums paid by motorists following the implementation of Government reforms in April 2013. The latest ABI quarterly index shows a 9% drop in actual premiums paid in the last year. The Government fully expects insurers to continue to meet their commitment to pass on the savings from these and other reforms to consumers.

The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end we are working closely with stakeholders across the industry to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

No estimate is available of any cost savings that might accrue from clarifying the courts' powers to strike out claims that are exaggerated or fabricated. However, we are considering what reform might be appropriate to the law in this area.

No figures are available for the number of victims of, or for the average loss incurred from, personal injury fraud. Across all forms of insurance the ABI estimates that fraud adds, on average, an extra £50 a year to the annual insurance bill for every UK policyholder.

However, we have already seen a fall in premiums paid by motorists following the implementation of Government reforms in April 2013. The latest ABI quarterly index shows a 9% drop in actual premiums paid in the last year. The Government fully expects insurers to continue to meet their commitment to pass on the savings from these and other reforms to consumers.

The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end we are working closely with stakeholders across the industry to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

No estimate is available of any cost savings that might accrue from clarifying the courts’ powers to strike out claims that are exaggerated or fabricated. However, we are considering what reform might be appropriate to the law in this area.

No figures are available for the number of victims of, or for the average loss incurred from, personal injury fraud. Across all forms of insurance the ABI estimates that fraud adds, on average, an extra £50 a year to the annual insurance bill for every UK policyholder.

However, we have already seen a fall in premiums paid by motorists following the implementation of Government reforms in April 2013. The latest ABI quarterly index shows a 9% drop in actual premiums paid in the last year. The Government fully expects insurers to continue to meet their commitment to pass on the savings from these and other reforms to consumers.

The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end we are working closely with stakeholders across the industry to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

No estimate is available of any cost savings that might accrue from clarifying the courts’ powers to strike out claims that are exaggerated or fabricated. However, we are considering what reform might be appropriate to the law in this area.

No assessment has been made of the effect of removing the Alcohol Duty Escalator on the levels of alcohol fraud. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) publishes estimates annually of alcohol fraud in “Measuring Tax Gaps”.

The ‘Reducing the number and cost of whiplash claims’ consultation closed on 8 March 2013. Submissions received from stakeholders are currently being analysed. The Government will publish its response in due course.