Chamber
Plenary, 11 May 2006
11 May 2006 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Scottish National Statistics
First and foremost, I thank those members—not all of whom are here—who gave me cross-party support to ensure that this debate could take place. Despite the turnout of members, the debate is important, because it is about trust in official statistics. That issue continues to grow as demands for evidence-based policies, international comparability and transparency increase.
Statistics drive decisions that affect everyone, including decisions on the allocation of public money to local government and the national health service. Operational decisions, policy interventions, policy evaluations and assessments of public service performance depend on statistics. The electorate obviously has a right to know as part of the democratic process.
Trust in statistics is essential for effective administration and the delivery of public services. If members of the public do not trust the figures, they will not trust decision makers and they will not believe Government statements. Survey results show that two thirds of the United Kingdom public believe that figures are changed to support arguments and that information about mistakes is frequently suppressed. I am among that 66 per cent. I am also among the 50 per cent-plus who believe that there is political interference in the production of statistics.
The June 2000 "Framework for National Statistics", which was signed by Scottish ministers and members of other Administrations, was a move in the right direction. It established a more formal code of practice and set up the Statistics Commission. Now, in "Independence for statistics: A consultation document", the Treasury proposes to entrench UK statistical independence in legislation by
"introducing direct reporting and accountability to Parliament, rather than through Ministers"
and
"placing a statutory responsibility on a new independent governing board to assess and approve all National Statistics against the code of practice, also backed by statute".
Those are further steps in the right direction, but what about Scotland?
In such a climate, the Scottish Parliament and the Executive have several options. Option 1 is that we do nothing and revert to pre-2000 arrangements, with no Statistics Commission and no statutory code. That would fail to meet any of the objectives of a statistics service. There would be no independent oversight, no guarantee of impartiality, no openness in selecting statistics to produce and no consistent handling and release of statistics. That would go completely against the UK Government's moves and recent legislation, such as freedom of information legislation. If that happened, the independence that has been proposed for the Office for National Statistics in London would be sacrificed, as Government statisticians there would use Scottish figures that would undermine their independence and the quality of their data, which would be disastrous.
Option 2 is that we replicate the current arrangements and set up a statistics commission for Scotland. The Statistics Commission for the UK has consistently worked to have itself replaced as a statutory body, so that would get us off to a poor start. It would, essentially, take us nowhere and give us no momentum. It would create no opportunity for Parliament to be the arbiter of the quality of our statistics.
Options 1 and 2 are seriously flawed.
That brings us to options 3 and 4. Option 3 is that we create an independent statistics office for Scotland that is modelled, in part, on the proposal for the Office for National Statistics. Option 4 is that we replicate the Treasury's proposals for the oversight of statistics at Whitehall and create a statutory compliance and audit body. Either of those proposals would be a significant improvement. They would offer greater independence for the Scottish system and ensure that the current UK system was not compromised by a lack of Scottish independence and accountability. That would be in the best interests of everyone and would offer a high-integrity direction of travel. Under current constitutional arrangements, there is sense in mirroring the proposed structure of the Office for National Statistics so that it and the Scottish body can work together without compromising the work of either.
Scottish legislation should be passed to enshrine that objective. We need a world-class system. Scotland is one of the few countries in the world that does not have statistics legislation. We need to correct that anomaly as soon as possible. No country can now join the European Union without such legislation, so we should not operate under a lesser standard. We should aim to meet all the statistical standards of the European Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the United Nations.
Ideally, the Scottish body should report annually to the Scottish Parliament, for example to the Finance Committee or the Audit Committee. With the current constitutional arrangement, the Scottish body should have statutory representation in the UK body to ensure that the UK figures relating to Scotland comply with the same standard of independence. At no point should there be ministerial control over any element of the statistics system; it would be better for ministers to work on the statistics that come out of the process.
I echo the words of the 1997 Labour Party manifesto:
"Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in government and defective policy decisions. The Scott Report on arms to Iraq revealed Conservative abuses of power. We are pledged to a Freedom of Information Act, leading to more open government, and an independent National Statistical Service."
That is exactly what we need.
My guru, W Edwards Deming, who transformed modern manufacturing, said that no improvement is possible in any system until that system is under objective, accurate statistical control. We should be satisfied with nothing less, especially when we are talking about the statistics of our country.
Statistics drive decisions that affect everyone, including decisions on the allocation of public money to local government and the national health service. Operational decisions, policy interventions, policy evaluations and assessments of public service performance depend on statistics. The electorate obviously has a right to know as part of the democratic process.
Trust in statistics is essential for effective administration and the delivery of public services. If members of the public do not trust the figures, they will not trust decision makers and they will not believe Government statements. Survey results show that two thirds of the United Kingdom public believe that figures are changed to support arguments and that information about mistakes is frequently suppressed. I am among that 66 per cent. I am also among the 50 per cent-plus who believe that there is political interference in the production of statistics.
The June 2000 "Framework for National Statistics", which was signed by Scottish ministers and members of other Administrations, was a move in the right direction. It established a more formal code of practice and set up the Statistics Commission. Now, in "Independence for statistics: A consultation document", the Treasury proposes to entrench UK statistical independence in legislation by
"introducing direct reporting and accountability to Parliament, rather than through Ministers"
and
"placing a statutory responsibility on a new independent governing board to assess and approve all National Statistics against the code of practice, also backed by statute".
Those are further steps in the right direction, but what about Scotland?
In such a climate, the Scottish Parliament and the Executive have several options. Option 1 is that we do nothing and revert to pre-2000 arrangements, with no Statistics Commission and no statutory code. That would fail to meet any of the objectives of a statistics service. There would be no independent oversight, no guarantee of impartiality, no openness in selecting statistics to produce and no consistent handling and release of statistics. That would go completely against the UK Government's moves and recent legislation, such as freedom of information legislation. If that happened, the independence that has been proposed for the Office for National Statistics in London would be sacrificed, as Government statisticians there would use Scottish figures that would undermine their independence and the quality of their data, which would be disastrous.
Option 2 is that we replicate the current arrangements and set up a statistics commission for Scotland. The Statistics Commission for the UK has consistently worked to have itself replaced as a statutory body, so that would get us off to a poor start. It would, essentially, take us nowhere and give us no momentum. It would create no opportunity for Parliament to be the arbiter of the quality of our statistics.
Options 1 and 2 are seriously flawed.
That brings us to options 3 and 4. Option 3 is that we create an independent statistics office for Scotland that is modelled, in part, on the proposal for the Office for National Statistics. Option 4 is that we replicate the Treasury's proposals for the oversight of statistics at Whitehall and create a statutory compliance and audit body. Either of those proposals would be a significant improvement. They would offer greater independence for the Scottish system and ensure that the current UK system was not compromised by a lack of Scottish independence and accountability. That would be in the best interests of everyone and would offer a high-integrity direction of travel. Under current constitutional arrangements, there is sense in mirroring the proposed structure of the Office for National Statistics so that it and the Scottish body can work together without compromising the work of either.
Scottish legislation should be passed to enshrine that objective. We need a world-class system. Scotland is one of the few countries in the world that does not have statistics legislation. We need to correct that anomaly as soon as possible. No country can now join the European Union without such legislation, so we should not operate under a lesser standard. We should aim to meet all the statistical standards of the European Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the United Nations.
Ideally, the Scottish body should report annually to the Scottish Parliament, for example to the Finance Committee or the Audit Committee. With the current constitutional arrangement, the Scottish body should have statutory representation in the UK body to ensure that the UK figures relating to Scotland comply with the same standard of independence. At no point should there be ministerial control over any element of the statistics system; it would be better for ministers to work on the statistics that come out of the process.
I echo the words of the 1997 Labour Party manifesto:
"Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in government and defective policy decisions. The Scott Report on arms to Iraq revealed Conservative abuses of power. We are pledged to a Freedom of Information Act, leading to more open government, and an independent National Statistical Service."
That is exactly what we need.
My guru, W Edwards Deming, who transformed modern manufacturing, said that no improvement is possible in any system until that system is under objective, accurate statistical control. We should be satisfied with nothing less, especially when we are talking about the statistics of our country.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S2M-4171, in the name of Jim Mather, on ensuring the independence of Scottish national sta...
Motion debated,
That the Parliament, in light of the proposals from HM Treasury for the establishment of an independent UK Office for National Statistics, notes that no prop...
Jim Mather (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
First and foremost, I thank those members—not all of whom are here—who gave me cross-party support to ensure that this debate could take place. Despite the t...
Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I congratulate Jim Mather on securing the debate and on not quite managing to clear the public gallery, as perhaps might have been expected given his chosen ...
Mark Ballard (Lothians) (Green):
Green
I join Derek Brownlee in thanking Jim Mather for bringing to the chamber this debate on a very important subject. Given the way in which the issue of waiting...
The Deputy Minister for Finance, Public Service Reform and Parliamentary Business (George Lyon):
LD
I congratulate Jim Mather on securing a debate on this important subject. It is disappointing that there appears to be so little interest in the subject in t...
Meeting closed at 17:30.