THE COMMISSION and NATIONAL STATISTICS � a new framework?
By IAN MACLEAN The White Paper and Framework Document set out the inspiring prospect of an actively participating democracy, where national statistics were to be regarded as part of the infrastructure of that democracy, providing both a window on the work of government and the basis for informed debate on issues of public concern and business decisions. The magnitude of this change should not be under-estimated as it requires a change in the culture of the official statistics service, a change from just meeting the needs of government to a national statistical service that meets the needs of the public and business. The principal actor is the National Statistician, but the Statistics Commission has the crucial role of ensuring that the transition from official to national statistics is made effective.
Illustration reproduced by kind permission of Richard Duckett
The Statistics Commission published its
second Annual Report last July, confirming
the impression that it is still very much
feeling its way forward without any clear
idea either of where it is going or how to
get there. The Commission started with a
clean sheet. There were no precedents
within the UK, although in almost all
developed countries there is an equivalent
body, albeit with varying responsibilities
and powers. No effort was made in the first
two years to learn from the experience of
other countries. Rather, the decision was
made to go it alone and see what happened
through a series of random ad hoc
initiatives � earth-shattering subjects such as
a scoping study on seasonal adjustment.
Given the current budget of the
Commission, it would take some 200 years
to work through the basic outputs from the
government statistical services, so obviously
the audit approach has its limitations! Quite
The Annual Report has no clear statement of
objectives and gives no indication that there
is any rational planning process in place,
just a series of loose statements. �Our work
programme assembles evidence on specific
points to support our policy� from
randomly selected topics (my words!), and
�we nurture and build on our relationships
with users�. This user relationship is, in fact,
little more than quarterly two-hour-long
lunchtime meetings between the User
Group Chairs and members of the
Commission. Enjoyable as these meetings
are, they cannot be construed as fulfilling
the requirement placed on the Commission
in the White Paper of �setting up a
mechanism� for identifying and evaluating
the needs of users. To develop a coherent plan, especially for a new organisation, intelligence gathering based on in-depth research is crucial. Research into:
The Commission�s budget is far too small to fund an independent internal system for identifying and evaluating �public issues� that are inadequately covered by National Statistics, but for far less than the underspend on the budget in the last two years the Commission could set up the machinery to tap into the experience of expert users, experience which covers virtually all these � hospital waiting lists, unemployment, asylum seekers, pensions, Enron-style national accounts� The organisations represented by the Statistics Users� Council and its Groups cover over two hundred thousand firms and twenty million people. Not a bad start! The Commission is taking tentative steps to get closer to expert users, and if it fully exploits their expertise the illustration to our review of their third Annual Report will feature a Chippendale chair. |