The actions were discussed. Following members’ discussion with Government Statistical Service (GSS) Deputy Heads, Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) had met with the Deputy Heads to understand their comments on methodology. Members discussed the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), both in terms of how OSR used it to support its regulatory work, and the risks of AI in the production of statistics.
It was agreed a paper on methodology would be brought to the next Committee meeting.
Regulation Committee were in the process of recruiting two independent members.
2. Update from the Director General for Regulation
The Director General for Regulation provided an overview of OSR activities since the December meeting, and highlighted some of their focuses and priorities.
Members heard that OSR had commenced its work on the annual State of the Statistical System report, and welcomed members’ feedback on the key themes identified. Members raised that the report would be important to support the incoming National Statistician to inform their understanding of the system and where their priorities should be. Members reflected on Number 10 appointing a lead statistician as an impact for OSR’s Intelligent Transparency review and were positive about the engagement this role could foster across the GSS.
The OSR People Survey results were discussed, with acknowledgment that it reflected members’ discussion with OSR staff in October 2025. The Committee maintained the importance of working to improve weaker scores and discussed how internal career progression could be improved.
Members discussed the Director General’s talk on ‘vulnerability’ and questioned whether ‘humility’ or ‘sensitivity’ would be better phrasing.
OSR presented a regulatory services update, outlining ongoing and planned work. Members heard that OSR were looking to develop a policy on repeat casework submitters. Work was ongoing with the National Statistician’s Office regarding sex and gender identity guidance, and members acknowledged OSR’s helpful work in this space. The Authority Chair was directly engaged with the harmonisation team to accelerate a tangible output to support stakeholders, but acknowledged the complexity of the issue. There had been considerable interest among the government analytical professions in the Standards for Public Use in Code 3.0, and work was ongoing to develop guidance to support AI models to adhere to the Code, this would be reported to the Committee later in the year.
3. Intelligent Transparency
OSR presented an update on their work on intelligent transparency, notably the scope, frequency and early considerations for the report card project, with a fuller design proposal to return to the Committee in April.
Members heard that the scope of the metrics focused on vital parts of the Standards for Public Use to produce an effective metric report that was not overly complex. There would be a mixture of quantitative and qualitative metrics, and OSR sought to improve the rates of producers citing sources by including this as a metric.
Members and OSR wanted to avoid unfair comparison between departments, and acknowledged the challenge of finding a balance between an overly simple and overly complex system. It would be valuable to add supportive narrative to balance the quantified evidence with the nuance and subjective elements.
The Committee were supportive of the work in this space and looked forward to a fuller discussion at the April Committee meeting.
4. Population Statistics
OSR introduced an update on OSR’s current regulatory work across population and migration statistics, including the regulatory approach to Census 2031, ONS 2021 Census phase 3 assessment update, National Records Scotland (NRS) 2022 Census phase 3 assessment update, and, emerging findings of OSR’s compliance review of ONS’ mid-year population estimates and response to ONS’ decision not to move to Admin Based Population Estimates (ABPEs) yet.
Members heard that ONS’ decision not to move to ABPEs had implications for OSR’s regulatory plans but that OSR had continued to engage with ONS throughout the process and planned to publish a response to ONS’ letter later that week. OSR recognised the clear and transparent messaging from ONS and would ask ONS to continue to present the strengths and weaknesses of their decisions to support questions from users. OSR understood the reasons for ONS’ decision but identified quality concerns in the emerging findings of their compliance review of mid-year estimates. The draft report would be considered at the April Committee meeting.
Members discussed the update. The following points were raised in discussion:
ONS should be clear about what a continuous improvement approach would look like
ONS’ communication of the decision to not use new methodology required humility;
ONS should learn lessons from its work on the dynamic population model and ABPEs to support development and ensure progress made was not wasted;
OSR had engaged with ONS throughout the process and were pleased with the transparent approach of the new Executive Director for Population Statistics;
members were supportive of the update on the assessment reports of ONS and NRS 2021/2022 censuses respectively.
The Committee supported OSR’s rigorous approach to regulation of population and migration statistics and continued engagement with ONS. Members acknowledged the complexity of the issue and the impact the decision to move away from ABPEs would have on some users.
5. Economic Statistics
OSR presented an update paper on work related to the regulation of labour market and economic statistics, including the ONS Labour Force Survey Transformation, the Northern Ireland Labour Market Survey (LMS) Transformation; HM Revenue and Custom (HMRC) review, seasonal adjustment of ONS Gross Domestic Product (GDP) statistics, and the draft scope of the ONS User Engagement Systemic Review.
Members heard that there were some emerging challenges in the Northern Irish LMS and OSR would likely recommend that NISRA publish criteria for the adoption of LMS-based estimates to ensure transparency for users. OSR noted the expected media coverage on the seasonal adjustment of GDP and discussed the communications aspects.
Members discussed the updates. The following points were raised in discussion:
the scope of the user engagement systemic review was wide to form a strategic view across topics and the ONS. OSR acknowledged the breadth of the scope and noted it provided better value for money, but that planning was required to ensure there was appropriate resource and investment;
the HMRC review was progressing well but required more focus on strategic and cultural challenges, OSR reiterated their call across the system for vulnerability and humility; and
ONS Transformed Labour Force Survey was a complex issue and it was important that OSR considered how its judgement would be clearly and directly communicated.
The Committee were supportive of the work and endorsed continuous regulation of sensitive economic topics.
6. Assessment Review: MEDR
OSR presented the draft assessment report of MEDR. OSR commended MEDR as a trustworthy organisation and identified quality requirements to ensure the statistics aligned with the Code of Practice. OSR sought the Committee’s endorsement of the review so it could be published before the pre-election period in Wales. OSR also updated on other regulatory engagement with Welsh Government around misuse of apprenticeship statistics.
Members discussed the report. The following points were raised in discussion:
work should be done on the formatting to clearly present recommendations and requirements up front;
OSR were undertaking some workshops with stakeholders to outline how OSR reached their conclusions, this had been successful; and
challenges around sex and gender identity emphasised the need for clarity and guidance for producers.
The Committee thanked OSR and agreed the draft report.
7. OSR Evaluation Strategy
OSR introduced the progress made on their evaluation strategy and development of draft Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). The Committee heard that OSR were looking to develop three to four measures per strategic theme, and sought to develop KPIs that produced meaningful and impactful measures. Baseline measures would be published in the summer.
Members discussed the draft Theory of Changes and draft KPI questions. The following points were raised in discussion:
it was clear a significant amount of work had been done in this space;
it was by nature difficult to measure some aspects of OSR’s performance without investing dedicated resource, and so it would be difficult to make a robust judgement on certain elements from anecdotal evidence;
members advocated leaning towards clear statistics and data over less tangible measures;
OSR should ensure the goals are realistic and achievable, and OSR should be able to clearly outline how they sought to achieve their objectives; and
members agreed this exercise should not absorb large amounts of OSR’s resource and questioned how to simplify the exercise.
The Committee discussed whether it would be most effective to commence the work and streamline it as it developed, with emphasis on ensuring crucial aspects were measured. They discussed the importance of remaining focus on key aspects so as not to exert excessive resource on an overly complex exercise.
8. Public Confidence in Official Statistics
OSR introduced their exploratory work into filling the evidence gap left by the discontinuation of the Public Confidence in Official Statistics Survey (PCOS). Members heard of the quality issues with the previous PCOS but noted that, despite these, the survey was drawn on frequently by OSR and ONS and its discontinuation leaves an evidence gap during an unstable time for the statistics system. Therefore, OSR was seeking to establish a new means of monitoring public perception of and confidence in official statistics.
The Committee discussed the importance of understanding public perception of official statistics.
The following points were raised in discussion:
to produce effective outputs, a strong response rate would be needed;
there should be a distinction to gauge attitudes between those who engage directly with official statistics and those who do not engage directly but gain their perception through news reporting or personal research, for example;
members discussed whether a new survey would need to be established, or whether questions could be added to an existing survey. The Authority policy team had previously investigated the possibility of adding questions to the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey, and OSR were exploring options with other departments;
members identified the British Social Attitudes Survey as a viable option as it would allow cross-referencing with general attitudes and other socio-economic information to draw valuable insights; and
the resource required to take forward this work and how to ensure valuable outputs would need to be considered and included in business planning.
The Committee expressed support for filling the evidence gap identified and noted the importance of understanding public attitudes in a tangible way. They endorsed OSR exploring this further, along with the Authority policy team.
9. Horizon Scanning
The Director General accepted that the Committee’s work had been focused on much of ONS’ work programme and related risks, and noted this was not representative of OSR’s work across the system. OSR committed to engaging the Committee with the risks associated with Northern Ireland’s Labour Market work, how to respond publicly to the HMRC review (April meeting), and the risks caused by changes to the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) family resources survey. Members discussed this case and acknowledged there would be similar knock-on effects from upgrading surveys, and OSR would need to develop a generic approach to such issues.
Members heard that there had been an increase in casework in the last quarter, likely caused by increased pressure on national and devolved governments ahead of the May elections. The Committee noted the positive impact of OSR’s intelligent transparency work.
10. Any other business
Members discussed the recruitment for two new independent members and highlighted the standards of applications, the panel were optimistic two valuable members could be recruited.
The Regulation Committee would next meet on 23 April.
