UK Statistics Authority

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to James Cartlidge MP – Chagos Islands deal

Dear Mr Cartlidge,

Thank you for your letter expressing concerns around the presentation of the cost of the Chagos Islands deal outlined by the Prime Minister in a press statement on 22 May. Specifically, he stated that

“£101 million a year is the average cost; the net overall cost is therefore £3.4 billion overall, that’s over the 99 years”.

You raised two concerns; first, that the Social Time Preference Rate used to calculate the figure of £3.4 billion was not the most appropriate measure, and second, that the source for the £3.4 billion had not been made available.

It is beyond the remit of the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) to determine the most appropriate discount rate to use for such calculations. But given the Government’s reference to the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) in defence of its chosen figure, we have confirmed with the OBR that they believe that this is a reasonable one to use when discounting the value of a lease.

The OSR has considered the transparency with which the calculation was communicated within the press statement. The press release provides a range of information for readers, including Notes for Editors. Our one concern is that by describing the £3.4 billion figure as the net overall cost, it was not made clear to the public that the figure was calculated using a discounting method.

In relation to the source of the calculation, the explanatory memorandum explains how the £3.4 billion figure was calculated, including reference to the use of the Social Time Preference Rate for discounting. We welcome that this information was made public at the time of the press statement in line with the principles of intelligent transparency. In future, we would encourage a link to this explanatory memorandum to be provided within the press statement in order to better support the public in understanding and scrutinising the figure.

We have raised these two points with the Prime Minister’s office and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.

Thank you again for raising this issue.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Georgia Gould MP – Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

Dear Minister,

Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

As you will know, the 2018 White Paper ‘Help Shape Our Future’ included the commitment to present a recommendation to Government on the future of population and migration statistics. This would respond to the Government ambition, as set out in 2014, that

“censuses after 2021 will be conducted using other sources of data and providing more timely statistical information”.

In March 2025, the National Statistician made a formal recommendation to the UK Statistics Authority Board which we have accepted and adopt as our own recommendation. Central to that advice, and the Board’s endorsement of it, has been:

the extensive research that the ONS has undertaken and published on the use of administrative data for population and migration statistics;
the ONS’s understanding of legal and privacy issues, adhering at all times to the ONS’s Data Strategy to ensure rigorous data security and protection;
the ONS’s research to understand public attitudes to administrative data and data linking, and its engagement with the National Statistician’s Data Ethics Advisory Committee;
the thorough assessment it has made of the opportunities and risks involved;
the findings of the wide-ranging public consultation process that it undertook in 2023; and
the assessments that it requested from the Methodological Assurance Review Panel (MARP) and the National Statistician’s Inclusive Data Advisory Committee (NSIDAC).

Sir Ian Diamond since stepped down as National Statistician on 9 May 2025. The Acting National Statistician Emma Rourke endorses the recommendation, and the Board continues to support it enthusiastically. The Board of the UK Statistics Authority is satisfied that the ONS has carried out a thorough public review of the future provision of population and migration statistics in England and Wales.

The public consultation undertaken to inform this recommendation found widespread agreement that more frequent and timely estimates of the population would be valuable to a wide range of users, including local and national policymakers, providers of public services, decision-makers in the private and voluntary sectors, and researchers and citizens seeking to understand our evolving society and economy better.

But respondents to the consultation, along with MARP and NSIDAC, identified several requirements that would need to be met for an administrative-based system to satisfy user needs in a robust and sustainable way.

Meeting these requirements will require additional work by the ONS, but also significant supporting action from Government, notably to improve and guarantee the flow of the necessary administrative data. The Authority Board, users and the public would need to be assured that these requirements are met before we could be confident of relying on a primarily administrative-based approach.

This is reflected in the core elements of the recommendation attached. These are:

that the UK Government commission and resource the ONS to conduct a mandatory questionnaire-based census of the whole population for England and Wales in 2031. This should support coherent UK outputs and maximise the benefits from the ONS’s work with administrative data to date, enabling further delivery of such benefits in the future.
that the UK Government commission and resource the ONS to develop statistical outputs using administrative data which provide more frequent estimates and are inclusive in representing society. This should include an administrative-based census of the population.
that the UK and Welsh Governments provide a commitment to the regular, reliable and ongoing flow of the critical administrative datasets required, ensuring that data owners deliver on that commitment, and invest in the required improvements to those sources and address the known points of friction that prevent data transfer.

As you will know, the power to call a traditional census for England and Wales rests with Ministers.

I commend this recommendation to you and look forward to the Government’s response in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Rt Hon Mark Drakeford MS – Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

This page is available in Welsh (Cymraeg).

Dear Mr Drakeford,

Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

As you will know, the 2018 White Paper ‘Help Shape Our Future’ included the commitment to present a recommendation to Government on the future of population and migration statistics. This would respond to the Government ambition, as set out in 2014, that

“censuses after 2021 will be conducted using other sources of data and providing more timely statistical information”.

In March 2025, the then National Statistician, Sir Ian Diamond, made a formal recommendation to the UK Statistics Authority Board which we have accepted and adopt as our own recommendation. Central to that advice, and the Board’s endorsement of it, has been:

the extensive research that the ONS has undertaken and published on the use of administrative data for population and migration statistics;
the ONS’s understanding of legal and privacy issues, adhering at all times to the ONS’s Data Strategy to ensure rigorous data security and protection;
the ONS’s research to understand public attitudes to administrative data and data linking, and its engagement with the National Statistician’s Data Ethics Advisory Committee;
the thorough assessment it has made of the opportunities and risks involved;
the findings of the wide-ranging public consultation process that it undertook in 2023; and
the assessments that it requested from the Methodological Assurance Review Panel (MARP) and the National Statistician’s Inclusive Data Advisory Committee (NSIDAC).

Sir Ian Diamond since stepped down as National Statistician on 9 May 2025. The Acting National Statistician Emma Rourke endorses the recommendation, and the Board continues to support it enthusiastically. The Board of the UK Statistics Authority is satisfied that the ONS has carried out a thorough public review of the future provision of population and migration statistics in England and Wales.

The public consultation undertaken to inform this recommendation found widespread agreement that more frequent and timely estimates of the population would be valuable to a wide range of users, including local and national policymakers, providers of public services, decision-makers in the private and voluntary sectors, and researchers and citizens seeking to understand our evolving society and economy better.

But respondents to the consultation, along with MARP and NSIDAC, identified several requirements that would need to be met for an administrative-based system to satisfy user needs in a robust and sustainable way.

Meeting these requirements will require additional work by the ONS, but also significant supporting action from Government, notably to improve and guarantee the flow of the necessary administrative data. The Authority Board, users and the public would need to be assured that these requirements are met before we could be confident of relying on a primarily administrative-based approach.

This is reflected in the core elements of the recommendation attached. These are:

that the UK Government commission and resource the ONS to conduct a mandatory questionnaire-based census of the whole population for England and Wales in 2031. This should support coherent UK outputs and maximise the benefits from the ONS’s work with administrative data to date, enabling further delivery of such benefits in the future.
that the UK Government commission and resource the ONS to develop statistical outputs using administrative data which provide more frequent estimates and are inclusive in representing society. This should include an administrative-based census of the population.
that the UK and Welsh Governments provide a commitment to the regular, reliable and ongoing flow of the critical administrative datasets required, ensuring that data owners deliver on that commitment, and invest in the required improvements to those sources and address the known points of friction that prevent data transfer.

The delivery of a census in 2031 will facilitate the ongoing partnership between the Welsh Government and the Office for National Statistics to develop high-quality Welsh language statistics that meet user needs.

I have written to commend this recommendation to the Parliamentary Secretary in Cabinet Office and now await the UK Government’s response.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Llythyr gan Syr Robert Chote at y Gwir Anrhydeddus Mark Drakeford MS – Argymhelliad mewn perthynas â Dyfodol Ystadegau am y Boblogaeth a Mudo

Mae’r dudalen hon hefyd ar gael yn Saesneg (English).

Annwyl Mr Drakeford,

Argymhelliad mewn perthynas â Dyfodol Ystadegau am y Boblogaeth a Mudo

Fel y gwyddoch, roedd Papur Gwyn 2018, ‘Helpu i Lunio Ein Dyfodol’, yn cynnwys yr ymrwymiad i gyflwyno argymhelliad i’r Llywodraeth ar ddyfodol ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo. Byddai hyn yn ymateb i uchelgais y Llywodraeth, fel y nodwyd yn 2014, y caiff cyfrifiadau ar ôl 2021 eu cynnal gan ddefnyddio ffynonellau data eraill ac y caiff gwybodaeth ystadegol fwy amserol ei darparu.

Ym mis Mawrth 2025, gwnaeth yr Ystadegydd Cenedlaethol ar y pryd, Syr Ian Diamond, argymhelliad ffurfiol i Fwrdd Awdurdod Ystadegau’r DU yr ydym wedi’i dderbyn a’i fabwysiadu fel ein hargymhelliad ein hun. Yn ganolog i’r cyngor hwnnw, a chymeradwyaeth y Bwrdd ohono, roedd:

yr ymchwil eang a wnaed ac a gyhoeddwyd gan y SYG ar y defnydd o ddata gweinyddol ar gyfer ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo;
dealltwriaeth y SYG o faterion cyfreithiol a phreifatrwydd, gan gadw at Strategaeth Ddata’r SYG bob amser i sicrhau mesurau cadarn i ddiogelu ac amddiffyn data;
ymchwil y SYG i ddeall agweddau’r cyhoedd at ddata gweinyddol a chysylltu data, a’i ymgysylltiad â Phwyllgor Cynghori’r Ystadegydd Gwladol ar Foeseg Data;
yr asesiad trylwyr a gynhaliwyd o’r cyfleoedd a’r risgiau dan sylw;
canfyddiadau’r ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus eang a gynhaliwyd yn 2023;
yr asesiadau y gofynnodd amdanynt gan y Panel Adolygu Sicrwydd Methodolegol (MARP) a Phwyllgor Cynghori yr Ystadegydd Gwladol ar Ddata Cynhwysol (NSIDAC).

Ymddiswyddodd Syr Ian Diamond fel Ystadegydd Gwladol ar 9 Mai 2025. Mae’r Ystadegydd Gwladol Dros Dro, Emma Rourke, o blaid yr argymhelliad, ac mae’r Bwrdd yn parhau i’w gefnogi’n frwd. Mae Bwrdd Awdurdod Ystadegau’r DU yn fodlon bod y SYG wedi cynnal adolygiad cyhoeddus trylwyr o’r ddarpariaeth o ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo yng Nghymru a Lloegr yn y dyfodol.

Canfu’r ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus a gynhaliwyd i lywio’r argymhelliad hwn gytundeb eang y byddai amcangyfrifon amlach a mwy amserol o’r boblogaeth yn werthfawr i amrywiaeth eang o ddefnyddwyr, gan gynnwys gwneuthurwyr polisïau lleol a chenedlaethol, darparwyr gwasanaethau cyhoeddus, gwneuthurwyr penderfyniadau yn y sectorau preifat a gwirfoddol, ac ymchwilwyr a dinasyddion sy’n ceisio deall ein cymdeithas a’n heconomi sy’n datblygu yn well.

Ond nododd y sawl a ymatebodd i’r ymgynghoriad, ynghyd â MARP ac NSIDAC, sawl gofyniad y byddai angen eu bodloni er mwyn i system sy’n seiliedig ar ddata gweinyddol ddiwallu anghenion defnyddwyr mewn modd cadarn a chynaliadwy.

Bydd angen i’r SYG wneud mwy o waith er mwyn cyflawni’r gofynion hyn, a bydd angen i’r Llywodraeth gymryd camau ategol sylweddol hefyd, yn benodol, i wella a gwarantu llif y data gweinyddol angenrheidiol. Byddai Bwrdd yr Awdurdod, defnyddwyr a’r cyhoedd am gael sicrwydd y caiff y gofynion hyn eu bodloni cyn y gallem fod yn hyderus ynghylch dibynnu ar ddull gweithredu sy’n seiliedig ar ddata gweinyddol yn bennaf.

Caiff hyn ei adlewyrchu yn elfennau craidd yr argymhellion a atodir, sef:

bod Llywodraeth y DU yn comisiynu ac yn rhoi adnoddau i’r SYG gynnal cyfrifiad gorfodol yn seiliedig ar holiadur o’r boblogaeth gyfan yng Nghymru a Lloegr yn 2031. Dylai gefnogi allbynnau cydlynol y DU a sicrhau bod gwaith y SYG gyda data gweinyddol hyd yn hyn yn darparu cynifer o fuddion â phosibl, fel y gellir parhau i ddarparu buddion o’r fath yn y dyfodol.
bod Llywodraeth y DU yn comisiynu ac yn rhoi adnoddau i’r SYG ddatblygu allbynnau ystadegol gan ddefnyddio data gweinyddol sy’n darparu amcangyfrifon mwy rheolaidd ac sy’n gynhwysol wrth gynrychioli cymdeithas. Dylai hyn gynnwys cyfrifiad o’r boblogaeth yn seiliedig ar ddata gweinyddol.
bod Llywodraeth y DU a Llywodraeth Cymru yn ymrwymo i sicrhau bod llif rheolaidd, dibynadwy a pharhaus o’r setiau data gweinyddol hanfodol sydd eu hangen, gan sicrhau bod perchnogion data yn cyflawni’r ymrwymiad hwnnw, ac yn buddsoddi yn y gwelliannau gofynnol i’r ffynonellau hynny ac yn mynd i’r afael â’r elfennau hysbys sy’n gwrthdaro ac yn atal data rhag cael eu trosglwyddo.

Bydd y broses o gynnal cyfrifiad yn 2031 yn hwyluso’r bartneriaeth barhaus rhwng Llywodraeth Cymru a’r Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol i ddatblygu ystadegau o ansawdd uchel am yr iaith Gymraeg sy’n diwallu anghenion defnyddwyr.

Rwyf wedi ysgrifennu i gymeradwyo’r argymhelliad hwn i’r Ysgrifennydd Seneddol yn Swyddfa’r Cabinet ac rwy’n aros am ymateb Llywodraeth y DU.

Yn gywir,

Syr Robert Chote
Cadeirydd

Dolenni perthnasol

Awdurdod Ystadegau’r DU yn argymell cyfrifiad yn 2031

Argymhelliad gan Awdurdod Ystadegau’r DU ar ddyfodol ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo yng Nghymru a Lloegr

James Cartlidge MP to Sir Robert Chote – Chagos Islands deal

Dear Sir Robert,

Misuse of statistics by the Prime Minister regarding the Chagos Islands surrender deal

I am writing to ask you to investigate claims made by the Prime Minister about the cost of the deal to surrender sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

Yesterday, when asked about the cost of the deal, the Prime Minister claimed it would be £3.4 billion, even after accounting for inflation. This figure is inaccurate.^[1]

Independent analysis suggests that, once a conservative rate of inflation is accounted for, the true cost of the deal is likely to be in excess £30 billion. That’s a difference of £27 billion – a substantial amount that could mislead the public about the real financial cost.^[2]

I understand the government has used the Social Time Preference Rate (STPR) to calculate the figure used by the Prime Minister. The figure is therefore a representation of ‘social time preference’, not a representation of the direct cost to the taxpayer. However, the Prime Minister stated that:^[3]

‘That is the net cost, and the reason it is put in those terms is because it is how the Government accounts for it, it is how the OBR counts the cost, and it is the way public sector projects are measured. In other words, what’s the net cost is today? And that is £3.4 billion. Obviously over time, with inflation, then that is the net cost’^[4]

The Prime Minister has therefore misrepresented the figure by stating that it is a net cost when in reality it is a figure for the social time preference. Such discounting in the public sector is intended to allow the costs and benefits of different policies with varying time spans to be compared on a common basis. But in this case, it is being used as a statistical sleight of hand to hide the true cost to taxpayers of this surrender deal and appears to be a breach in the Code of Practice on Statistics which states that:

‘Statistics, data and explanatory material should be presented impartially and objectively’^[5]

Furthermore, the government has failed to publish the source statistics despite the Code of Practice on Statistics stating:

‘Policy, press or ministerial statements referring to regular or ad hoc official statistics should be issued separately from, and contain a prominent link to, the source statistics’^[6]

The government’s failure to publish the statistical methodology therefore appears to be in breach of the Code of Practice on Statistics.

As the UK Statistics Authority, your role is to promote transparency and accuracy in the use of public data. I therefore ask you to investigate whether the Prime Minister’s figure follows the Code of Practice on Statistics to make sure that public confidence in public statistics is upheld.

The public deserves clarity on this matter, especially given the government’s cuts to the Winter Fuel Payment and the tax hikes it has imposed on businesses. A transparent assessment will help to maintain trust in official figures.

I am placing this letter in the public domain.

Yours sincerely,

James Cartlidge MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

Footnotes

^[1] In response to a question from David Shephard from the Financial Times yesterday, the Prime Minister said: ‘That is the net cost, and the reason it is put in those terms is because it is how the Government accounts for it, it is how the OBR counts the cost, and it is the way public sector projects are measured. In other words, what’s the net cost is today? And that is £3.4 billion’ (Prime Minister and Defence Secretary Statement on Chagos Islands, 22 May 2025, archived).
^[2] The Daily Telegraph, 22 May 2025, archived.
^[3] GOV.UK, UK/Mauritius, 22 May 2025, link.
^[4] Prime Minister and Defence Secretary Statement on Chagos Islands, 22 May 2025, archived.
^[5] ONS, Code of Practice for Statistics, 5 May 2022, link.
^[6] ONS, Code of Practice for Statistics, 5 May 2022, link.

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP – Scottish attainment gap

Dear Ms Duncan-Glancy,

Thank you for your letter of 21 March outlining concerns around the First Minister of Scotland’s use of statistics about the poverty-related educational attainment gap. At First Minister’s Questions on 27 February, he said: “the overall poverty-related attainment gap [in Scotland] has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10”.

The Scottish Government monitors the attainment gap through a series of thirteen key measures as part of the National Improvement Framework (NIF). Taken together, these are the data by which the Government measures the poverty-related attainment gap and the impact of its education policies.

Scottish Government officials confirmed to us that the 60 per cent figure used by the First Minister was taken from statistics on follow-up leaver destinations. Chart 4 of the supplementary tables shows that the difference in the percentage of school leavers in a positive follow-up destination (nine months after leaving school) between the most deprived and the least deprived has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10.

These statistics are not one of the thirteen measures included within the NIF. The Framework does include a similar measure – initial positive destinations of school leavers – which also shows a reduction in the gap between the most and least deprived students since 2009/10. However, both of these statistics measure outcomes once students have left school, not their educational attainment whilst in school.

When making claims about a reduction in the ‘overall’ attainment gap, we would expect the Government to use the NIF to help evidence this, and that this assertion would reflect a reduction in more than one measure relating to attainment. The First Minister should have been clearer that he was referring to a specific set of statistics to evidence his claim, particularly as it was based on data which is not part of the NIF.

To maintain trust and confidence in their statements, Ministers should take care that when they claim progress of their policies it is by their own defined measures, or otherwise clearly explain the source of separate data so that it is readily accessible for policy experts and the public to understand. We have raised these matters with the First Minister’s office.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Jeremy Balfour MSP – Health and Wellbeing Census Scotland

Dear Mr Balfour,

Thank you for your letter of 27 February 2025.

We are pleased that the Scottish Government has now published the Health and Wellbeing Census Scotland: Background Report. We consider that this document provides valuable information to users and demonstrates that the Scottish Government has reviewed its approach to developing questions for the Health and Wellbeing Census as the OSR requested in its letter of 27 July 2022.

As you set out, a thorough review of the legal and ethical status of the survey lies more so within the remit of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to decide on and undertake. From our discussions with ICO, we understand that they presently have no plans for a further review, beyond their engagement and action to date. It is also worth clarifying that because ICO could only act in relation to compliance with data protection law, some of the issues you have raised, such as the ethical use of opt-outs, are outside the regulatory remit of both ICO and OSR.

However, if they judge that a joint review is necessary, we are willing to help. I am grateful that your scrutiny of the Health and Wellbeing Census has encouraged closer working links between OSR and ICO.

The concerns that you and your constituents raised have clearly been justified by the lessons learned by all parties in this case. If the Scottish Government or other statistics producers decide to run another survey of this nature, we will work closely with ICO to ensure that it is done to the highest standards.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Matt Vickers MP – police workforce figures

Dear Mr Vickers,

Thank you for your letter of 21 February regarding the use of police workforce statistics by Dame Diana Johnson, Minister of State for Police, Crime and Fire.

The claim in question was made during the debate on the Police Grant Report on 5 February 2025. The Minister stated,

“there were 149,769 police officers in March 2024, but in June – when the Conservative Government were still in power – that figure had been reduced by 1,232 to 148,536 officers.”

We examined this and determined that the figures cited by the Minister were published on 22 January 2025 as an annex in the Police workforce: 30 September 2024 bulletin. As such, the figures were publicly available at the time the claim was made.

However, we note that these figures are published management information rather than part of the regular statistics on police numbers, and so were not included or referred to in the separate data tables accompanying the bulletin.

We have discussed this approach with Home Office statisticians and will continue to support them in finding the best ways to publish management information outside of regular statistical releases, so that they are readily accessible when ministers and officials use them publicly. Thank you again for raising this matter with us.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP to Sir Robert Chote – Scottish attainment gap

Dear Sir Robert,

Scottish Government Attainment Gap Statistics

I am writing to seek the assistance of the UK Statistics Authority in establishing the accuracy of claims made by the First Minister of Scotland, John Swinney MSP, regarding the Scottish Government’s progress on closing Scotland’s poverty-related attainment gap. These claims appear to be at odds with the statistical evidence available and now risk misleading the Parliament and general public.

At First Minister’s Questions on 27 February 2025, Mr Swinney stated that “the overall poverty-related attainment gap has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10”. The statement has drawn attention from the public and the media and gives the impression that overall educational inequality has significantly improved — an assertion which has since been publicly challenged.

The Ferret Fact Service has investigated this claim and concluded it to be “mostly false”, noting that there is no agreed overall measure of the attainment gap in Scotland and that the First Minister’s claim is based solely on the measure of “positive destinations” — a metric which refers to the number of school leavers going on to further education, training, or commencing employment. This means the claim fails to account for progress, or lack thereof, in other key areas of educational attainment, such as National 5 and Higher exam results, achievement against Curriculum for Excellence levels, and performance against key literacy and numeracy benchmarks.

In many of these other measures, the gap between pupils from the most and least deprived backgrounds has either narrowed only modestly or remained largely unchanged. As such, I believe it to be highly misleading to describe a 60% reduction in one narrow metric as reflecting an “overall” closure of the attainment gap.

When statistics are used to justify policy decisions that directly affect the lives of children and young people, they must be presented with accuracy and honesty. Misrepresenting such data — intentionally or through omission — undermines public confidence, risks eroding trust in our public institutions, and undermines the serious work required to tackle long-standing inequality in our education system.

I would therefore welcome your views on:

Whether the First Minister’s claim that the “overall” attainment gap has reduced by 60% is a misleading use of official statistics; and
Whether the Scottish Government has sufficiently justified its use of this figure, especially given its decision to use a single outcome measure rather than a comprehensive overview of educational attainment.

I would also welcome any guidance you may wish to offer to ensure that statistics relating to sensitive and multi-dimensional issues, such as the poverty-related attainment gap — where public trust in government data is paramount — are not presented in a misleading way.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely

Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP
Member of the Scottish Parliament for Glasgow Region (Scottish Labour Party)
Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Education

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Mark Griffin MSP – figures on Scottish Planning Approvals

Dear Mr Griffin,

Thank you for your letter regarding the claim made by the Minister for Public Finance on 12 November 2024 that

“164,000 homes across Scotland have planning permission but are not yet built”.

As noted in your letter, the supporting data was subsequently published in response to your Parliamentary Questions, but this should not be used as a standard approach for releasing data. According to the principles of intelligent transparency, data should be available publicly at the same time that officials make statements based on it, with an explanation of context, sources, and limitations. The Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) has raised this issue with the Scottish Government’s Chief Statistician, who has explained that he is currently raising the profile of intelligent transparency beyond the statistics profession within the Scottish Government to ensure that these principles are embedded across Government. The OSR will be working closely with the Chief Statistician to support him in these efforts.

The data for this claim are based on Housing Land Audits data which is sourced from local authorities. We agree that the quality of this data remains unclear based on the limited information included in the response to your Parliamentary Question. Future uses of this claim should clearly indicate that this is a high-level estimate.

We understand that there is a long-term plan to improve the data and statistics on housing in Scotland. The OSR will continue to engage with the Scottish Government as this development work progresses, to ensure that the standards set out in the Code of Practice for Statistics are adhered to.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to James Cartlidge MP – Chagos Islands deal

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Georgia Gould MP – Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Rt Hon Mark Drakeford MS – Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

Recommendation on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics

Related links

Llythyr gan Syr Robert Chote at y Gwir Anrhydeddus Mark Drakeford MS – Argymhelliad mewn perthynas â Dyfodol Ystadegau am y Boblogaeth a Mudo

Argymhelliad mewn perthynas â Dyfodol Ystadegau am y Boblogaeth a Mudo

Dolenni perthnasol

James Cartlidge MP to Sir Robert Chote – Chagos Islands deal

Misuse of statistics by the Prime Minister regarding the Chagos Islands surrender deal

Footnotes

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP – Scottish attainment gap

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Jeremy Balfour MSP – Health and Wellbeing Census Scotland

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Matt Vickers MP – police workforce figures

Related links

Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP to Sir Robert Chote – Scottish attainment gap

Scottish Government Attainment Gap Statistics

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Mark Griffin MSP – figures on Scottish Planning Approvals

Related links