RSS Edinburgh Local Group Response to request to give written evidence on the provisions of the Statistics and Registration Services Bill which impact on Scotland

Download the response as a word document

Alan Forrest, Chairman

7th January, 2007

Drawing on responses and advice from:

  1. In her letter, 8 Dec 2006, Rosalind Wheeler invited the Edinburgh Local Group of the Royal Statistical Society to give written evidence on the provisions of the Statistics and Registration Services Bill which impact on Scotland.
  2. This is the response from the Edinburgh Local Group. The opinions here are not necessarily those of the Royal Statistical Society as a whole.
  3. The RSS has already made public its views on the Statistics and Registration Services Bill and has given formal evidence, both written and oral, to the Finance Select Committee at the Houses of Parliament, London. The RSS has also expressed general views on the role, development and future of Government Statistics.
  4. We put these documents to the Finance Committee as evidence, as many of their general points apply equally well to Scottish and UK Statistics, and several points deal explicitly with devolved Statistics. We quote some of these below.
  5. In addition to this evidence, the Edinburgh Local Group wishes to add or emphasise some points that are specially relevant to the Scottish legislative consent of the Bill, as follows:
  6. We believe the provisions will benefit Scottish National Statistics. The inclusion of Scottish National Statistics in the proposals will demonstrate that Scottish National Statistics are produced to a common UK standard, produced independently and subject to independent scrutiny. This will reinforce the integrity, independence and quality of Scottish National Statistics. Failure to include SNS in the proposals would give the opposite impression, whether or not this would actually be the case.
  7. In connection with a common UK standard, we agree with Sections 12-13 of the RSS written response insofar as they remain relevant to the current state of the Bill:

    "12. The system should be UK based and involve the Devolved Administrations:
    European and international commitments require a focal point (the National Statistician) and domestic needs demand an ability to produce coherent UK-wide statistics and the ability to make valid comparisons between the countries of the UK. The whole system should take account of the needs of all users including the administrations and citizens in devolved territories."

    "13. The current arrangements have not delivered coherent statistics across the UK. In our view the situation is serious and worsening. This causes a problem both for those seeking information at a UK wide level and for the Devolved Administrations and others wishing to make comparisons across the UK. It impedes assessment of the success of devolution itself. It risks putting the UK in breach of its duties to the European Union. We do not agree that the existing concordat meets the requirement."

  8. The two other options for Scottish National Statistics are not attractive: either a separate Scottish Board whose role and demarcation would be difficult to manage and which might be more expensive: or a system with no such Board which would be worse than current arrangements where there is a degree of scrutiny by the Statistics Commission.
  9. The ability to share comparable information, for statistical purposes, with other Government Departments should have considerable benefits for Statistics in Scotland.
  10. Nevertheless, we are concerned that a UK-wide statistical standard might be applied rigidly and insensitively to areas of statistics that have a fundamentally different basis in Scotland. This concern was expressed by senior members of Scottish National Statistics at the RSS Consultation Meeting in Edinburgh on 30th May 2006.
  11. For example, Scottish Criminal Justice Statistics are not always comparable with those of England and Wales because of the basic differences in their Legal Systems; not only the numbers themselves require qualification but the statistical structures or tables in which these numbers are presented as well. A UK standard for such statistics would put artificial strain on their presentation and interpretation unless it were, in effect, two standards. In this example, a double standard of presentation is probably the only true and pragmatic solution.
  12. We wish our view on this matter to be put on record for the proposed Board: that, in general, fundamental or unavoidable incompatibilities between Statistics on each side of the Border, such as the example above, should be noted by the Board and acted on sensitively.
  13. This view does not require a change of legislation and so a legislative consent motion to the Scottish Parliament seems the simplest way to ensure the desired aims of the legislation regarding Scotland.
  14. In summary, we believe that the extended role of the Statistics Board would give benefit to Scottish National Statistics, both in setting and monitoring standards of Scottish National Statistics and in including Scotland in the provisions for joined-up and reciprocal information sharing.