Next Meeting: 10 February 2025, London

Members present

• Professor David Hand (Chair)
• Dame Kate Barker
• Sarah Cumbers
• Phyllis MacFarlane
• Sarah Moore
• Guy Nason

Additional attendees

• Gordon Blunt (for item 2)
• Sonia Carrera (for item 4)
• Nicola Fulton (for item 6)
• Rob Kent-Smith (for Ed Humpherson)
• Julian McCrae (for item 5)
• Ian Townsend (for item 4)
• Neil Townsend (for item 6)
• Neil Wilson (for item 4)
• Jennet Woolford (for item 3)

Secretariat

• Kerri Gourley
• Sally-Ann Jones

Apologies

• Eva Aizpurua
• Professor Paul Allin
• Helen Boaden
• Professor Paul Boyle
• James Brooks
• Professor Sir Ian Diamond
• Ed Humpherson

1. Minutes and matters arising

1. Members were welcomed to the meeting. Apologies were received from Eva Aizpurua, Helen Boaden, Professor Paul Boyle, James Brooks, Professor Sir Ian Diamond and Ed Humpherson. Minutes of the meeting on 21 October 2024 were discussed and it was noted that the minutes of the meeting on 21 October were approved, subject to two comments relating to discussions around the creation of a document to make the National Statistician’s Expert User Advisory Committee more accessible to users and ensuring that the sessions of the UK Statistics Assembly were recorded.

2. Discussion with User (Gordon Blunt) [NSEUAC(24)17]

1. Gordon Blunt, a freelance Statistician who has worked with several local small charities and nonprofit organisations, joined the meeting to reflect on their perspective as a user of statistics. The following key points were made:
   1. Gordon had worked with small charities and nonprofit organisations who often would not have data of their own to provide them with reliable data;
   2. the Office for National Statistics (ONS) was praised for providing reliable data that was trusted by the general public and it was highlighted the statisticians who work within the ONS had always been very helpful;
   3. it was noted that data provided by ONS was very detailed at local level which was extremely helpful as well as having the functionality to create a custom data set which would outline any missing areas;
   4. ONS data was clean e.g., few errors with formatting and inconsistent names which could be time consuming to rectify, ONS’ data was also annotated well and caveated where appropriate;
   5. several things ONS could improve were outlined including the website not returning the most recent statistical bulletin, the spotlight pages could lead journalists to overemphasis the latest period and ONS data sets are not always the easiest to be understood by laypersons;
   6. the feedback provided was helpful for ONS and it was noted that website transformation was underway within the organisation to ensure that content was more user focused and accessible;
   7. members discussed ONS developing an Application Programming Interface (API) noting this is one of the most important things that the organisation should be developing;
   8. ONS should stay away from doing too much analysis and forecasting enabling them to focus on a clear strategy;
   9. ONS should meet a variety of user needs when accessing ONS data;
   10. ONS should think about the approach when communicating data and set the data in a context so that journalists cannot sensationalise datasets;
   11. members also discussed data gaps it was highlighted there was not any major gaps except local internet access; and
   12. members welcomed the presentation and it was agreed that discussions would take place around Gordon assisting with testing the ONS website prototypes.

3. Analytical Priorities[NSEUAC(24)18]

1. Jennet Woolford presented a paper which gave an overview of the ONS’ Analytical Priority setting process which included governance structures used for setting Analytical Priorities. Members heard how the Analytical Framework supported the mitigation of Strategic Risk 1 ‘Ensuring our statistics and analysis keep pace with changing priorities’ and as a means of horizon scanning, looking for gaps in analysis and how to address this and more recently the Analytical Framework had been used as a means to manage ad hoc publications which had increased since the COVID-19 Pandemic. The framework would pivot to meet the needs of users and evolving needs of the organisation. This framework was managed through three governance boards Analytical Priorities Board, Outputs Group and Strategic Outputs Committee and members also heard a list of the organisation’s current analytical priorities.
2. Members discussed numbers of ad hoc releases per theme, per quarter. Members discussed topics of ONS analysis and noted that these are the type of conversations that occur at outputs group to ensure transparency. ONS has reduced the volume of analytical releases post pandemic to help manage the website transformation and resourcing pressures within the organisation. Members also discussed how ONS grouped analytical themes together to tell a broader story. Members also discussed the definition of priority as it was noted there had not been much released on housing, inflation and financial resilience in the last six months. However, it was explained that this does not mean the organisation would look to release more publications on the topic but they would prioritise ad hoc publications if required. Measuring impact was also discussed and this was mainly done through media and social media engagement and that this does not always present the full picture. The relationship between analytical priorities and business planning was also touch on.

4. Environmental and Natural Capital Accounts [NSEUAC(24)19]

1. Ian Townsend presented a paper on the ONS’ Environmental and Natural Capital Accounts which outlined how the organisation had been working on Environmental Accounting since the late 1990’s and included the results in the Blue Book since 2020. Members heard that the ONS had been a leader in producing a system of United Nations System of Environmental Economic Accounting (SEEA) which looks at interactions between the environment and the economy in both directions. Members also heard that the team were looking to improve Environmental and Natural Capital Accounts through further quality improvements to gain official accredited status by increasing timeliness and granularity where possible and engaging with International Frameworks. Given appropriate resourcing, ONS would continue to be a world leader in this space and ensure the environment was reflected in decision making.
2. Members discussed who the key users were for both Natural Capital and Environmental Accounts, key stakeholders such as the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, HM Treasury and the Devolved Administrations as well as the general public were listed. It was noted that the ONS had a reciprocal relationship with some of the environmental Non-Government Organisations as they provided some of the data that fed into the natural capital accounts and are recipients back of the information they put in. The SEEA accounts were internationally comparable, particularly in the Environmental Accounts and European Union space, as well as several other countries. Members also discussed what the international coverage was of Natural Capital and Environmental Accounts and whether the users of the accounts were those countries who did not already produce environmental accounts. Collaboration on environmental accounts took place internationally via the UN Committee of Experts on Environmental Accounting, as well as bilaterally with other National Statistics Institutes. Lots of the ONS code used to produce its environmental and natural capital accounts was accessible in public repositories to encourage development in the area.
3. Members welcomed the update and it was highlighted that there was a link to a UN report giving information on what other countries produce for environmental accounts in the paper if members wanted to look into the topic further.

5. Integrated Data Service and the National Data Library [NSEUAC(24)20]

1. Julian McCrae presented an update on progress on the Integrated Data Service (IDS). Members heard that the IDS had been making steady progress over the years. Investment had been secured for 2025/2026 to continue development of the platform and the IDS had an increasingly rich data environment. The IDS had recently gained a range of HM Revenue and Customs data which would enable indexing to take place. Linking the data together would enable the organisation to undertake several interesting projects. Members also heard that analytical use cases were starting to emerge on projects that would not have been able to occur without the linkage infrastructure which has been built around the IDS.
2. Members discussed the National Data Library and it was highlighted that collaboration with the Department for Science Innovation and Technology (DSIT) was ongoing in the discovery phase and there are not currently firm plans around the end result for the National Data Library however they are currently looking at creating an API data infrastructure with the private sector enabling data sharing. The data usage would be mainly on an operational use basis as opposed to analytical. The National Data Library may not have any data in it but would provide pathways to government departments and create agreements to share data. It was noted however that this could be subject to change depending on the results of the discovery phase but should be something that the IDS could integrated into it. It was highlighted that the Royal Statistical Society was supportive of the DSIT team and was encouraging their presence at the upcoming Statistics Assembly to help understand user needs. Members also discussed the relationship with users and the progress that had taken place to improve the user experience and ensure that the transition from the Secure Research Service would be smoother.
3. Members welcomed the update and the progress that had been made on improving the IDS.

6. Statistics Assembly [NSEUAC(24)21]

1. Sarah Moore presented the final update on the Statistics Assembly before the event would take place on 22 January. Members heard that the plans received positive feedback from the UK Statistics Authority Board in November who were content with the plans for the assembly. Members heard that attendance was continuing to rise from a broad range of sectors. The structure of the Assembly was outlined and it was noted sessions would be structured around the discussion topics and led by externals outside of the statistical system. Details would then be provided to the National Statisticians Expert User Advisory Committee (NSEUAC) to write the report which would go to the UK Statistics Authority Board. Members also heard that the team were looking into putting an international slot in the afternoon and draft topics were still being refined ahead of circulating the agenda shortly.
2. Members discussed the danger of the event becoming oversubscribed and a strategy had been developed to ensure that ONS and Government Statistical Service attendees would be asked to attend virtually if the event was oversubscribed. Members also discussed the size of break out groups and potentially capping the breakout rooms to average sizes out. There were some topics that would have been on the agenda but there was not enough demand from users e.g. crime and net zero, it was highlighted that the agenda was broadly based out of the call for contributions. Members also discussed overlaps in data on crime collected by ONS and the Home Office it was noted this would be a discussion to surface at the Assembly on what are the asks of the wider statistical system. It was noted that raising awareness and education about what data is readily available should be discussed at a future NSEUAC meeting.
3. Members were supportive of the plans for the assembly and members were thanked by the team for their support advice and challenge in the planning of the event.

7. Any other business

1. The next meeting was due to take place via MS Teams on 10 February 2025.