The litany of failures in UK statistics must stop

 

Lawmakers, economists, public sector workers, academics — every profession attempting to understand and shape modern society relies on good data. For a long time, the UK’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) was seen as a global leader, seemingly beyond reproach. But the mask has slipped. 

Those working on our official statistics, including at the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA), which oversees the ONS, have been forced to acknowledge significant problems on several occasions before quickly reassuring us that they have it under control. Concerned that a deeper malaise was being deliberately hidden from view, the committee of MPs I chair took a closer look. I’m afraid what we’ve discovered was nothing short of staggering. 

Let’s be clear: the leadership of our country’s vital statistical data function has overseen a catastrophic decline in standards. A weak board, defined by what they are not responsible for rather than what they are, has failed to confront systemic failures and lost the confidence of the government, parliament and most of its staff. 

Take one example that came up in a recent session. An internal ONS report found deep-seated problems including poor communication between the leadership and junior staff. How did the chair of the UKSA learn of this work? By chance, during a random water-cooler chat a year later. It would be comical if it weren’t so depressing. 

So where does the buck stop? When the committee asked the current (fairly newly-appointed) interim national statistician, Emma Rourke, if anybody had been held accountable, we were simply told “no”. When we tried to pin down witnesses on specific mistakes, we were often told the person responsible had left. I simply do not accept the idea that a public figure can leave their role and avoid scrutiny of past choices. The committee will, therefore, seek evidence from those who took crucial decisions before leaving their role — including former head of the ONS, Sir Ian Diamond. 

Thankfully, the past few years have seen a series of very important and serious reviews. You might presume that this means a transformation project is well under way. I refer the reader back to Rourke’s earlier answer. The incessant delays while we await review after review are beyond tiresome. If the house is on fire, why do the bosses need to wait for five people to tell them the building’s about to collapse before they phone the fire brigade? 

As is so often the case, the rot can be traced back to the organisation’s apparent disregard for basic rules. Hiding behind their reputation and prestige, it appears that officials gave themselves carte blanche to hire and fire without due process, believing they knew better. 

The result was disastrous. Square pegs met round holes, with the inevitable consequence of senior staff jumping ship. If the organisation is to successfully recover, this poor practice must be eradicated. 

We have diagnosed the illness, now it’s time for the cure. As ministers hastily attempt to fill gaps left by the rapid senior exodus, I am intent on preventing a repeat of past failures. Concerned by a lack of detail on the responsibilities of each role, I am pushing the Cabinet Office for transparency. This cannot wait for long, complex recruitment processes to begin. Another request I have made is for interview panels to include respected statisticians. This will restore confidence and credibility to an organisation which is in short supply of both.

🔔Like, Share & Subscribe for more update

For more update:

Visit Us 👇

Website Link: https://statisticsaward.com/,

Nomination Link: https://statisticsaward.com/award-nomination/,

Registration Link: https://statisticsaward.com/award-registration/,