Benefits scandal: New government also brushes off children’s ombudsmen

If study debts stem from the benefits scandal, then write them off. That is the plea five local children’s ombudsmen make to the cabinet. But their request is turned down flat.

In the benefits scandal the Tax and Customs Administration from 2004 wrongly accused many thousands of parents of fraud. They were fined and had to repay large sums, which left them deeply in debt.

In recent months local children’s ombudsmen have campaigned on behalf of children of the benefits scandal who were saddled with high student debts. They wrote a report: It’s not your (study) debt!

That report gives facts and figures about more than 1,800 affected students who took part in the ombudsmen’s research. They often borrowed money from DUO to financially support their parents.

Phone number

The previous cabinet opened a special phone line at DUO in its final days, where children of the benefits scandal could go with their questions. But write-offs could not simply be granted.

Last week the new cabinet published a response to the ombudsmen’s report and this week that position was confirmed in answers to parliamentary questions from SP, GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA. The new cabinet appears to follow the course set by its predecessors.

“The cabinet greatly appreciates that young people told their story again”, the response says, for example. “The cabinet recognises the harrowing stories the children’s ombudsmen have gathered and shares the conviction that these young people deserve and need ongoing attention.”

Via parents

But that must not cost money. The cabinet reasons as follows: the parents receive compensation for the benefits scandal, for example 30,000 euros, and with that they can also repay any study debts of their children.

For the suffering of the children the child scheme has been introduced: children of the benefits scandal receive a maximum of 10,000 euros from the state plus support from municipalities.

The ombudsmen believe the cabinet cannot simply brush aside these young people’s problems. Compared with other students these children have high student debt twice as often and also dropped out of their studies twice as often. More than half suffered significant delays to their studies.

Motion

A majority of the House of Representatives (except VVD, SGP and JA21) already wanted to know last October how many children of these parents have study debts and what it would cost to write off those debts.

But the cabinet rejects the motion citing privacy rules. DUO Student Finance and the Implementation Organisation for the Recovery of Benefits say government agencies may not exchange citizens’ names. That would require a change in the law and the cabinet will not go down road.

It does say that ‘tailored solutions’ at DUO are possible, for example to write off the performance grant in exceptional circumstances. However, no one can check how often anyone is actually helped.

Burden of proof

Reverse the burden of proof, the ombudsmen now suggest. Let the government prove that those debts were not caused by the benefits scandal. These children are, after all, the victims of the government, not the other way around. The cabinet has not yet responded to that, but the idea does not fit with its current stance.

NSC founder Pieter Omtzigt owed part of his popularity to his determined efforts to get to the bottom of things. The current state secretary for the recovery of the benefits scandal, Sandra Palmen-Schlangen, served in the previous cabinet on behalf of his party. She is now independent, after NSC disappeared from the House of Representatives.