UK Statistical System Code of Practice Office for Statistics Regulation
UK Statistics AuthorityCorrespondenceUK Statistics Authority

Letter from Professor Dame Carol Propper to Seamus Logan MP – statements on water quality

Dear Mr Logan,

Thank you for your email of 5 September to the Acting National Statistician regarding comments by the former Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, that drew comparisons between England and Scotland’s water industry regulation.

I respond on behalf of the UK Statistics Authority’s Regulation Committee, which oversees the independent regulator, the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR). Whereas normally the Chair of the Authority would respond to your concern, she has instead asked me to respond in her place, to avoid the risk of a perceived conflict of interest with another role.

Judgements about regulation of the water industry and broader environmental policy are rightly for you and your colleagues in the UK Parliament and devolved assemblies to consider. However, we have looked at some of the statements made as part of our role enforcing the Code of Practice for Statistics; a full list of these is enclosed in Annex A.

In brief, we consider that these statements lacked enough transparency about their sources to be verified, and that the broad evidence did not support them. Without appropriate discussion of the limitations of some of the more specific figures quoted, they run the risk of misleading the public.

As you point out, the then-Secretary of State said several times that water pollution and water quality are worse in Scotland than in England. He made these claims repeatedly in the House of Commons, as well as in broadcast interviews and online. We also note his letter of 24 July to Stephen Flynn MP published on X, which cites a range of statistics in response to the dispute over his claims.

The table of figures appended to the letter is not relevant to water pollution and water quality, but in the body of his letter he further claimed, without providing a source, that in 2023-24, there were 35.8 pollution incidents per 10,000km of sewerage network in Scotland, and 35.4 in England and Wales combined.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs told us that its source for Scotland was an analysis of Scottish Water’s annual report, and for England and Wales, Ofwat’s water company performance report, wherein pollution incident rates are broken down by company. The sector average given for both England and Wales combined is 35.42. These water companies’ territories do not neatly match national boundaries, so it is not simple to calculate pollution incidents in England alone.

Underlying regulatory data on pollution incidents are not yet available for Wales or Scotland, although an Environmental Standards Scotland report claims Scottish Water has a lower incident rate (36) than English water companies (41), when including incidents from water supply assets. However, there are many differences in monitoring and reporting of pollution incidents data, so the Independent Water Commission (IWC) cautions against making these comparisons between countries. It is important to provide this context when referring to them in public debate.

The IWC concluded its review of the water sector on 21 July, and in its final report there are several sets of statistics directly relevant to water quality and other environmental data. It would have greatly improved public understanding to draw upon these figures, given their relevance, quality, and importance to the Government’s stated ambitions. The figures show broadly that Scotland has a similar or better share of bathing and surface water sites that meet good or excellent standards for water quality. The OSR has published a further analysis of this topic, which I enclose in Annex B.

The Authority expects that ministers take care to avoid using data that is overly selective or missing appropriate context. Based on the statements made without discussion of their context, sources, and limitations, there is the potential for people to be misled about English and Scottish water quality and infrastructure. As former Chairs have said, omitting this kind of information can damage public trust in the data, so we encourage those speaking on behalf of Government to ensure statistical statements are presented clearly and transparently, in a way that supports public understanding.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Dame Carol Propper
Chair of the Regulation Committee

 

Annex A

  • “[…] you were just hearing about Scottish Water, they’re nationalised, pollution in rivers in Scotland is worse than in England”
    Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, BBC One, 20 July
  • “In Scotland they have a nationalised water company, but pollution levels in Scotland are worse than they are in England“
    Channel 4 News, 21 July
  • “Scotland has a nationalised water company… and water pollution is worse than in England as a result”
    House of Commons, 21 July and republished online at X.com
  • “… under the nationalised model in Scotland, pollution is worse, not better.”
    House of Commons, 21 July
  • “Official statistics […] show several areas where Scotland’s water quality underperforms relative to England.”
    Letter to Stephen Flynn MP, 24 July
  • “There were 35.8 incidents per 10,000km of sewer in Scotland versus 35.4 incidents per 10,000km of sewer in England and Wales reported in 2023-24.”
    Letter to Stephen Flynn MP, 24 July
  • “OFFICIAL: The SNP are managing water pollution in Scotland even worse than the Tories did in England”
    @SteveReedMP on X.com, 25 July
  • “Levels of pollution in England are bad enough, but under the SNP in Scotland they are even worse”
    House of Commons, 4 September
  • “I have published the data and I stand by it: pollution under the SNP in Scotland is even worse than it was under the Tories in England.”
    House of Commons, 4 September

Annex B

OSR statement on statistics concerning aspects of water in Scotland and England

 

Related links

Seamus Logan MP to Emma Rourke – statements on water quality

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Helen Morgan MP – NHS appointment statistics

Dear Ms Morgan,

Thank you for your letter regarding the Government’s claim of delivering 3.6 million additional NHS appointments in the first eight months of its term.

The OSR has verified the accuracy of the figure of 3.6 million additional elective appointments based on official statistics produced by NHS England, compared to the same period in the previous year.

On the question as to whether this represents a ‘massive increase’ in NHS activity, this is outside of our remit to comment on. We do not seek to be a mediator in political debate; however it is important that information is available that allows informed public debate. At the time the press releases you referred to were published, it was not possible to consider the scale of the increase in a historical context as the data were not available prior to July 2023. Given the importance of this matter, the OSR has engaged with NHS England and we are pleased to report that the data back to April 2018 have now been published.

You raised a concern that the Government had not defined how it was measuring appointments or what baseline it was using. The OSR reviewed the Labour Party Manifesto, the Government’s ‘Plan for Change’ and press releases, and determined that the measure of their target for extra appointments, which is defined in the official statistics as ‘additional elective operations, appointments and tests’, has generally been communicated clearly and consistently. In addition, the Government has been transparent that the target was to be measured against the previous year’s figures.

Thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robert Chote
Chair

 

Related links

Helen Morgan MP to Sir Robert Chote – NHS appointment statistics

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

Dear Sir Robert,

Thank you for the UK Statistics Authority’s recommendation on the future of the census. I am writing to confirm that HM Government is commissioning the Office for National Statistics to conduct a mandatory, questionnaire-based, whole-population census of England and Wales in 2031.

High-quality population and migration statistics underpin central and local government service delivery, resource allocation and policy development. In delivering the whole population 2031 Census you may incorporate the innovative use of administrative data where possible and appropriate, but above all the census must meet the needs of the wide range of statistical users and provide accurate data to support informed decision-making across government, business, and civil society.

I would also like to emphasise the importance of close collaboration with the devolved administrations in Scotland and Northern Ireland as they deliver their own censuses in 2031, and with the Welsh Government to ensure our census reflects their specific national needs. Strengthening coherence in population statistics across the UK is essential for making accurate comparisons and supporting shared policy objectives. By working together, we can develop a harmonised approach that meets the unique needs of each nation while delivering a robust framework for nationwide census data.

The success of the 2021 Census demonstrated the potential of a predominantly online approach and achieved a remarkable response rate. This set a strong foundation for the 2031 Census to go even further, though efforts must be made by ONS to ensure inclusivity and to capture the characteristics of harder-to-reach individuals and communities who may have limited access to the internet.

The Future of Population and Migration Statistics (FPMS) programme has received substantial support from HM Government over the last few years. Spending Review 2025 has now concluded and a settlement has been reached to allow ONS to start preparatory work for Census 2031. This programme, and the ONS more widely, must continue to ensure all taxpayers’ money is spent wisely and efficiently.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the FPMS programme team for the considerable work undertaken to date and their ongoing commitment to excellence in the field of statistics.

Yours sincerely,
Georgia Gould MP
Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office

 

Related links

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

UK Statistics Authority recommends a census in 2031

Recommendation from the UK Statistics Authority on the future of population and migration statistics in England and Wales

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

 

Related links

James Cartlidge MP to Sir Robert Chote – Chagos Islands deal

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

 

Related links

UK Statistics Authority recommends a census in 2031

Recommendation from the UK Statistics Authority on the future of population and migration statistics in England and Wales

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

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

 

Related links

UK Statistics Authority recommends a census in 2031

Recommendation from the UK Statistics Authority on the future of population and migration statistics in England and Wales

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

 

Helen Morgan MP to Sir Robert Chote – NHS appointment statistics

Dear Sir Robert,

I am writing to raise concerns about the possible misrepresentation of official NHS statistics by the Government in relation to its pledge to deliver two million extra appointments.

In February 2025, Health Secretary Wes Streeting announced that the Government had not only met its pledge early but had achieved a “massive increase” in NHS activity, citing 3.6 million additional appointments in their first eight months. This figure has since been widely used by ministers and Labour MPs as evidence of substantial progress.

Data obtained through a Freedom of Information request by the independent fact-checking charity Full Fact, however, shows the opposite: new NHS activity has slowed under this government.

The Nuffield Trust have described the two million target as “very modest”, while the Institute for Fiscal Studies said it was smaller than the annual growth in demand pressures forecast by the Government. In fact, it represents less than a 3% increase in activity. These facts directly contradict the narrative of an impressive ramping up of activity.

Additionally, the Government failed for months to define how it was measuring appointments or what baseline it was using, hindering independent verification. Only after the announcement that the pledge had been met did ministers release a partial definition, still without the baseline figures needed to properly assess performance.

The presentation of this data as a substantial acceleration in NHS delivery, without context or full transparency, appears to mislead the public about the true state of progress. I therefore ask that you investigate the Government’s statements regarding NHS appointment statistics, and offer your guidance on whether they accurately reflect the underlying data and trends.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,
Helen Morgan MP, Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Health and Care

 

Related links

Letter from Sir Robert Chote to Helen Morgan MP – NHS appointment statistics

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.

 

Related links

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

 

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

 

Related links

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