WIREDGOV

The FDA has warned that the Office for National Statistics is at ‘crisis point’ and statistical outputs could be put ‘at risk’ in its evidence to the Treasury Sub Committee Inquiry into the efficiency of the Chancellor’s Departments..

 

The FDA cited the recent debate in the House of Lords on the Statistics and Registration Service Bill (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70502-0013.htm#07050268000090) outlining the negative impact on the department of the efficiency agenda, relocation of the London office and poor management of people and processes. 

 

According to the FDA evidence:

 

“The cumulative impact of the need to deliver efficiency savings, the requirement to relocate many key areas of work away from London and poor management of people and processes is putting the future delivery of ONS’s outputs at risk.”

 

Specifically:

 

·      The FDA is concerned that the twin drives for efficiency and relocation will lead to a decline in the quality of the statistical products and run counter to the intention of improving trust in official statistics.

 

·      There is no other country in Europe (except Germany which has a highly federal structure) that does not have a significant National Statistical Office presence in its capital city.

 

·      The FDA believes that the business case for relocation is fundamentally flawed.

·      The FDA’s view is that an effective independent Statistics Board cannot operate without a London base.

 

·      The FDA is concerned that the new ONS Board, which will be running not only the replacement ONS, but also the Government Statistical Service, will not have the option of retaining a statistical presence in London.

 

·      There are no mechanisms in place in many areas to prevent a steady departure of skilled staff who can easily find alternative employment in London. Many have years of experience and national and international reputations in their fields. It seems inconceivable that such skills can be replaced in the short term.

 

·      It is clear that ONS will need to find an additional 400 professional staff in Newport to make the move from London work. ONS already has difficulties with the recruitment of professionals in Newport – in March 2007. There are very few existing London based staff that have expressed a willingness to transfer to Newport.

 

·      If ONS loses its presence in London, the ethnic balance of the staff in the office will inevitably change such that it will be less representative of the UK population as a whole.

 

·      It is likely that a high proportion of those who are made surplus will be from ethnic minorities and/or disabled. Given that the original proposal to reduce the ONS London presence had an adverse impact as far as the Race Equality Impact Assessment was concerned (and was only barely accepted by the CRE after mitigation measures were put in place), the FDA does not believe that the consular presence proposal can be justified.

 

The FDA’s concerns were validated during the recent Lords debate on the Statistics and Registration Service Bill on 2 May, where there was broad consensus that moving the ONS London office wholesale to Newport, Wales could pose challenges in recruitment of qualified staff.  

 

Lord Newby stated:

 

“… of the division which produces the RPI and the CPI—it has a staff of 35—not one of them had chosen to relocate to Newport and that there were serious risks to the production of those statistics over the coming months.”

 

“… However much one might favour the principle of relocation, the cost and benefits weigh the other way. It seems to me that in respect of certain of the functions of the ONS, as the noble Lord, Lord Lea, explained, the argument for moving to Newport has not been made.