Statistics and Registration Service Bill

moved Amendment No. 52: 52: Clause 9, page 5, line 8, at end insert ““, taking account of the principles set out in the European Statistics Code of Practice, the United Nations Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics and any other relevant international codes or agreements”” The noble Lord said: In moving AmendmentNo. 52, I will speak also to Amendment No. 60 in the name of my noble friend Lady Noakes, which is grouped with it. Amendment No. 52 would require the board when giving, "““guidance and advice to persons responsible for official statistics””," to take account of the two main international statements of principles; namely, the European code and the United Nations fundamental principles. In Amendment No. 60, my noble friends have exactly the same objective, but they have linked it to the board’s code of practice. The result might be almost exactly the same, but I see some merit in making the requirement explicit and directly binding on the board, which would happen if it comes into Clause 9, but I would not die in a last ditch for that. The two primary international codes are the United Nations Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics, which were adopted in 1994 by the UN Statistics Commission, which describes itself as, "““the highest statistical authority in the world””," after lengthy international discussion, and the European Statistics Code of Practice, which was aEU Commission recommendation endorsed by EU economic and finance Ministers in November 2005. The EU code, I am advised, explicitly recognises the UN code and is consistent with it. There are other international statistical agreements and principles—I instance the 1993 System of National Accounts—but all such more specific agreements are consistent with the overarching codes. My argument for making reference to these well respected international codes in the Bill is that it would leave no doubt in the mind of Parliament, government or the board as to the scope of the ground that is to be regarded as the proper territory of the board. Without such express reference, the board might find itself accused of stepping beyond the remit that Parliament intended or act in fear of such criticism. There is almost nothing in the Bill to indicate the nature of the guidance that the board may give. The two codes give express guidance to the board as to what is legitimately within its remit. That is the purpose of including the reference. Equally important, reference in the Bill to the international codes will remind the board to make sure its guidance is consistent with international expectations or to consider fully the consequences of offering advice that might be seen to be at odds with the international consensus. That is important in building the international credibility of the UK statistical service. The noble Lord, Lord Moser, has already told the Committee that other countries do not face the same problem of the falling-away of public trust and are puzzled as to why we suffer it. Therefore, it is important that we should be able to satisfy them that our statistical service has the international credibility that it deserves. Reference to the two codes is important in that regard. I shall not go through the international codes in detail—they are lengthy documents—but there is nothing in either of them that need cause anxiety. They are the synthesis of good sense in statistical matters. For instance, Principle 1 of the UN code makes it clear that, "““official statistics that meet the test of practical utility are to be compiled and made available on an impartial basis by official statistical agencies to honor citizens’ entitlement to public information””." Some people might think that that is a clearer exposition of what the Bill is about than appears in the Bill. Principle 6 of the UN code states: "““Individual data collected by statistical agencies for statistical compilation, whether they refer to natural or legal persons, are to be strictly confidential and used exclusively for statistical purposes””." That is an international obligation to which this country has subscribed. Individual privacy, which we shall come to discuss, is a matter of concern to many in this Chamber, and it is helpful to have such a clear statement of principle from the UN. The UN code has stood the test of time—some14 years have gone by without significant amendment—and the EU code, while newer, has been accepted by all the European statistical offices as the basis of a Europe-wide assessment function carried out under the principles of peer review. The UK statistical service is, I am advised, to be reviewed against the EU code this year. It would be wrong for the Statistics Board to do anything other than work in close partnership with the EU arrangements. Amendment No. 52 would expressly import the two conventions into the Bill by requiring that the board take account of those international codes. I beg to move.