For the time being, DUO does not have to come up with heavier evidence if the student finance company accuses students of cheating on the basic grant for those living away from home, a majority in the parliament decided.
DUO uses home visits to check whether students who receive a grant for living away from home actually live on their own. Last year, research by news agency HOP, Investico and NOSop3 (in Dutch) showed that this almost only happened to students with a non-western migration background. Moreover, the service sometimes relies on flimsy neighbourhood interviews and sloppy home visits.
In a parliamental debate last week, parties Groenlinks-PvdA, SP and DENK called on the government ‘to adopt a new control method where the burden of proof is placed less on students and more on DUO’. The motion was rejected.
Human measure
However, a majority does believe that affected students should receive a personal letter of apology. The parliament also believes that legislation should be tested on ‘human measures’ and that anti-fraud measures should be screened for discrimination. DUO should work with scientifically based algorithms from now on. But a majority does not want to rule out ‘risk-based supervision’ in advance.
When the news from HOP, Investico and NOSop3 came out last year, now outgoing minister Dijkgraaf disabled the algorithm DUO used to determine who was to expect a home visit. That algorithm was indirectly discriminatory and never properly substantiated. In the debate, Dijkgraaf said he wants to further scrutinise the system of checks.
Comments are closed.