The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chairman:
Sir
Nicholas
Winterton
Baker,
Norman
(Lewes)
(LD)
Baldry,
Tony
(Banbury)
(Con)
Brady,
Mr. Graham
(Altrincham and Sale, West)
(Con)
Brennan,
Kevin
(Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet
Office)
Brown,
Mr. Russell
(Dumfries and Galloway)
(Lab)
Devine,
Mr. Jim
(Livingston)
(Lab)
Engel,
Natascha
(North-East Derbyshire)
(Lab)
Fabricant,
Michael
(Lichfield)
(Con)
Griffith,
Nia
(Llanelli) (Lab)
Hemming,
John
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(LD)
Hurd,
Mr. Nick
(Ruislip-Northwood)
(Con)
Laxton,
Mr. Bob
(Derby, North)
(Lab)
Lepper,
David
(Brighton, Pavilion)
(Lab/Co-op)
Lucas,
Ian
(Wrexham) (Lab)
Ryan,
Joan
(Enfield, North)
(Lab)
Walker,
Mr. Charles
(Broxbourne)
(Con)
Sara Howe, Committee
Clerk
attended the
Committee
Third
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Monday 2
March
2009
[Sir
Nicholas Winterton in the
Chair]
Draft
Official Statistics Order
2009
4.30
pm
The
Chairman: I shall be extremely strict because I anticipate
a lengthy debate. If there is a vote in the Chamber, I shall suspend
the sitting for a quarter of an
hour.
The
Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Kevin
Brennan): I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Official Statistics Order
2009.
I
shall follow your clear hint about this highly controversial order, Sir
Nicholas. May I say how pleased I am to serve under your chairmanship
again? I have done so occasionally before as a Minister in a previous
job as well as in Westminster Hall and it is always a great
pleasure.
All members
of the Committee will be aware of the important work being done by the
UK Statistics Authority. It was created last year by the Government and
has a statutory responsibility to promote and safeguard the production
and publication of official statistics. Two of its main functions are
to monitor and report on official statistics wherever they are produced
in the United Kingdom and to assess independently the quality of a core
set of key, official statistics for formal approval as national
statistics.
The
order relates to the definition of official statistics that the
authority must monitor and on which it must report. Under the
Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007, which created the
Statistics Authority, all statistics produced by the Office for
National Statistics, Departments, devolved Administrations and other
Crown bodies are automatically deemed to be official statistics. It
means that numerous bodies are automatically under the oversight of the
Statistics Authority and must follow its code of
practice.
The
Act also allows us to add further statistics by order so that we can
cover bodies that do not fall within the core definition, but that
clearly produce statistics in which it is important for people to have
trust. Bodies that do not fall within the core definition, but which
should be covered, include the Training and Development Agency for
Schools and the Independent Police Complaints Commission. If a body is
included in the order, the public can be assured that the Statistics
Authority can monitor and comment on its statistical work. It also
makes it possible for a statistic to be nominated for formal assessment
as a national statistic, assuring the public that it has been produced
in a way that is fully code
compliant.
Last
year, during the debate on a similar order, which was the first such
order under new system, the Government accepted that they would need to
return to the House
with a new list of bodies. The priority then was to
make sure that all producers of national statistics were covered, but
that other bodies were included, with different Departments applying
different criteria for nominating bodies for inclusion. This year, we
have made the criteria clearer and I hope that the Committee agrees
that the result is a more coherent list. The bodies in the list are
producers of significant national-level statistics that the Government
feel that the public should
trust.
Under
the Act, we are required to consult the Statistics Authority before
laying the order. My officials have worked closely with the authority
while drafting the order. The authority has had several opportunities
to comment on the draft order and, after the formal consultation
required by the Act, it said that it was content with what is before us
today. We expect to update the list once a year. It is an advantage of
the flexible definition under the Act that we can respond to changing
needs and refine the list subject, as we are today, to parliamentary
scrutiny.
In
summary, the order extends the number of bodies that are subject to the
oversight of the UK Statistics Authority. They will have to work to the
new code of practice for official statistics, and their statistics will
have the potential to be nominated for formal assessment by the
authority to be national statistics. The order is a vital part of the
Governments statistical reform programme, allowing greater
independent monitoring and assessment of official statistics to enhance
public trust in
statistics.
Michael
Fabricant (Lichfield) (Con): I am following the
Ministers explanation with interest and I see the logic of all
that he has said, but can he reassure me on one matter? I always become
a little nervous when we hear about co-operation between different
bodies, not because there is anything wrong with joined-up government,
but because of the risk of privacy leaks. Is there any risk of
individual data being lost or is there any other possible ramification
that we should be wary of regarding the privacy of the
individual?
Kevin
Brennan: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention,
which was thoughtful, as always. The order is not one about sharing
statistics, which would be subject to scrutiny elsewhere, but it is
important, as he says, for public bodies to be able, with the proper
safeguards, to share statistics, not least, as I am sure he would
agree, sometimes to reduce the burden on business of the
Governments activities. This order, however, simply refines the
list of bodies, the statistics of which will be treated as official
statistics for the purposes of the
Act.
4.36
pm
Mr.
Nick Hurd (Ruislip-Northwood) (Con): Your guidance, Sir
Nicholas, was characteristically subtle, but even I detected that the
briefer the contribution, the happier the Chairman, so I will follow
that course.
The order is
basically a sensible evolution of the Official Statistics Order 2008.
As the Minister clearly explained, it does no more than expand the list
of institutions with which the Statistics Board can work in monitoring
output. It is another brick in the wall in the Herculean task that the
board and the Government face in rebuilding public trust in statistics
and data released by the Government.
In registering
our approval of the order, it would be wrong of me not to place on the
record our concern that there continues to be a gap between what the
Government say and the legislative process that we are scrutinising
today, and what they continue to do. Let me illustrate that. I know
that you, Sir Nicholas, are a dedicated reader of The Guardian.
You will remember that before Christmas it revealed that the Government
were embroiled in another damaging row about crime figures and that the
head of the UK Statistics Authority on that occasion had accused the
Home Office of releasing selective knife crime figures.
He said that the figures were premature, irregular and
selective. He revealed that statisticians behind the data had
tried to prevent the Government from publishing the information and he
said that the decision to publish the data in their current form was
corrosive of public trust. However sensible this order
is, we clearly have a long way to go before the damage done by the
current Governments reputation for manipulating statistics and
data is healed. The order is a small step on a long
journey.
4.39
pm
John
Hemming (Birmingham, Yardley) (LD): I am pleased to serve
under your chairmanship again, Sir Nicholas. I think that you
and I share concern about one statistic, which is that relating to the
adoption targets that the Government half scrappedthey managed
to scrap one half of them, but not the other. That is a good example of
how a statistic can be badly produced, because they compared the number
of children adopted in any one year with the number of children in
care. From a dimensional analysis perspective, that means that they are
comparing the number of people per year with the number of people. One
hopes that this type of order will prevent that from happening in
future. It is basically a meaningless figure from a statistical point
of view, because when one analyses the dimensions on the
numerator and the denominator, they are different. Therefore, the figure
does not show us something that we would wish to see.
Before I was
banned from talking to the statisticians and the database managers in
what was the Department for Education and Skillsnow the
Department for Children, Schools and FamiliesI managed to work
out how they could produce the figures properly, and that is what we
have done. Obviously, I support the order, but I would be very pleased
to see the statistics produced properly. It would be nice if
performance assessment framework C23 were scrapped as
well.
The
Chairman: I call the Minister to reply succinctly to what
has been a succinct debate.
4.40
pm
Kevin
Brennan: Indeed I shall, Sir Nicholas.
I hear the
point that the hon. Member for Ruislip-Northwood makes on behalf of his
party, and I understand why he makes it. I simply say that what is good
for the goose is good for the gander. The hon. Gentleman will be aware
that his partys Front-Bench spokesperson produced some
statistics over the Christmas period, which were based on a trawl of
parliamentary questions about police forces, but those statistics
themselves were not really ready for release in the form in which he is
asking us to release Government statistics. May I ask the hon.
Gentleman to consider a code of practice governing the way in which the
Opposition use statistics, so that we can all contribute to enhancing
public trust in statisticsGovernment and Opposition
alike?
None the
less, I welcome the support that the Opposition and the hon. Member for
Birmingham, Yardley have expressed for the
order.
Question
put and agreed to.
4.41
pm
Committee
rose.