What is the “suspicion score” of the CAF, accused of discriminating against the most precarious?
[ad_1]
Are the most precarious accused of being more likely to cheat on family benefits? The association for the defense of digital freedoms Squaring the net published an investigation on Monday in which it denounces an algorithm that it considers discriminatory used by the National Family Allowance Fund (Cnaf).
Used by Cnaf since 2011, this statistical tool aims to identify among the 13.5 million beneficiaries most likely to make errors in their declaration, explains to AFP the general director of Cnaf, Nicolas Grivel.
However, the beneficiaries of certain social minimums must complete quarterly tax returns with complex forms and are more at risk of making errors, indicates Cnaf.
“Our objective is to limit as much as possible declarative errors and their consequences in terms of generation of undue income”, specifies Nicolas Grivel, who affirms that it is “not discriminatory” and does not “necessarily target the poorest people but those whose income varies.”
But for Quadrature du net, which obtained the computer code of this tool via a request for access to administrative documents, each beneficiary appears in the Cnaf files according to a “suspicion score”. Updated every first of the month, this score is between 0 and 1, and the closer it gets to 1, the more suspicious the recipient is.
“A particularly pernicious surveillance system”
From the start, this score would be higher for people with low incomes, unemployedrecipients of minimum social benefits as well as residents of “disadvantaged” neighborhoods, and lower for the most well-off people.
As a result, the poorest would have a greater chance of being controlled after a simple change in situation, such as a movingthan a wealthier beneficiary.
“Little by little, light is being shed on a particularly pernicious mass surveillance system,” denounces the association which was only able to access the source code of two algorithm models used by the CAF between 2010 and 2018, the organization refusing to share the current version of the system.
In the spring, the Changer de Cap collective had already mentioned the “opacity” of these algorithms and called for the implementation of random controls. La Quadrature du net points the finger at other institutions such as Health Insurance, Old Age Insurance, Agricultural Social Mutualities or Pôle emploi which also use automated systems to fight against welfare fraud.
Very difficult to assess, this would represent a shortfall of several billion euros for the State. For social benefits alone, it would be estimated between 6 and 8 billion per year, according to the Court of Auditors. Last May, the government unveiled a plan to save money and double recovery by 2027.
[ad_2]
Source link