Statistics and Registration Service Bill

Not surprisingly, as we put our names to some of these amendments, we support them. I do not wish to repeat the extremely powerful arguments made so far in this debate; I just want to maketwo points about the strength of the argument, the moving of responsibility for the Statistics Board—the residual responsibilities, as the noble Lord, Lord Moser, described them—to the Cabinet Office. The first point harks back to the debate we had a few moments ago about regions. One of the key features of the Statistics Board is that it has to deal with the fact that the nations as well as the regions of England have a major part to play in the whole production of statistics—that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland need to produce their own statistics. It seems to me that if one is looking at a place in government which worries and thinks about the roles of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales in the round, it is the Cabinet Office rather than the Treasury. As a co-ordinator of the inputs of the nations and regions, the Cabinet Office seems a more logical place. The second argument relates to resources, paradoxically in some ways. I think that a Treasury in charge of the Statistics Board is more likely to be macho about its budget than the Cabinet Office, which is worried about the quality of the statistics produced. The Minister has said on a number of occasions, ““The budget has been set for five years ahead. Why should one be worried?””. One should be worried because it has not been set necessarily at an adequate level. Certainty has a value of its own, obviously, but if the level is wrong certainty is not sufficient. At Second Reading I referred to the cuts in staffing among statistical staff, and the consequence of that along with the move to Newport in terms of the production of statistics moving forward. Since Second Reading I have received a communication from someone who works within the ONS and shares these concerns. I would like to refer to that now, partly because it is absolutely relevant, but also because I think that the question of the short-term situation in which we find ourselves is pretty serious. This person is concerned because he believes that senior staff within the ONS are more worried about the financial targets they have been asked to meet than in maintaining statistical quality. He continues: "““The reality regarding relocation is that very few London staff are able or willing to move to Newport and it is proving impossible to recruit sufficient replacements in South Wales.The most worrying example at present is the division that produces the RPI and CPI. The Division is due to relocate this year. So far none of the 35 staff have chosen to relocate, including international experts. The risks to the production and quality of these key statistics is of serious concern to the London staff.""There is serious danger that similar problems will occur with National Accounts and labour market statistics. The impact on measuring the economy and setting economic policy could be disastrous””." That is the consequence of Treasury control of our statistical service. It is only an ancillary argument to some of the extremely powerful arguments made by the noble Lord, Lord Moser, but it certainly reinforces me in my belief that the Treasury is not an adequate place to manage and retain residual responsibility for the Statistics Board.