Statistics and Registration Service Bill

I am grateful to both noble Lords who have spoken in this short debate, particularly to the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, who attests to why a perspective that is wider than that of Whitehall can be of advantage. The Government stand by the statutory objective in the Bill. That objective is a cornerstone and is appropriate, succinct, broad and high level. It is a clear statement of the overall purposes of the board. The board must, "““promote and safeguard … the quality … good practice … and … the comprehensiveness of official statistics””," that serve the public good. It is from that core objective that the board’s functions flow. I understand that emendations can be made to that in a number of ways. The noble Lord has made a persuasive case, but I do not think that we should specify that there should be local and national levels. The objective uses the term ““public policy”” to encompass the intention that official statistics should play a part in supporting an evaluation of policy at all levels. The noble Lord, Lord Dearing, indicated that ““regional”” might play its part between ““local”” and ““national””. We think that ““neighbourhood”” or even ““international”” statistics might play their part in certain contexts, as well as ““local””, ““regional”” and ““national””. So, to be totally comprehensive, we could use phrases in the Bill that would detract from its precise core objective. I assure the noble Lord that the broad ““public policy”” objectives include local, regional and national objectives.