Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

MPs pile on pressure for statistics chief to resign

Lea Paterson
Friday 18 December 1998 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

DR TIM HOLT, director of the Office of National Statistics, was under increasing pressure to quit yesterday when MPs criticised management failings at the Government agency.

The Committee claimed the ONS was poorly-structured and under-funded and recommended a wide-ranging shake-up of the agency.

The report stopped short of directly criticising Dr Holt, already under fire over the recent fiasco over official average earnings data. But the report noted: "In view of the many challenges facing the ONS, strong leadership, both from its director and ministers, is vital".

According to the Committee, the ONS has failed to meet the needs of many of its customers and "several aspects of the ONS's performance to date indicate a lack of strategic direction". The Committee also raised concerns about the structure of the ONS, saying that the ONS director had insufficient managerial power, and that the agency ought to be more independent from government.

The critical report will increase the pressure on Dr Holt to stand aside after October's controversial revisions to average earnings numbers, a key indicator used by the Bank of England when setting interest rates.

The Bank and the Treasury were both said to be furious after the ONS revised the numbers twice in the space of a fortnight. The revisions removed the surge in earnings at the beginning of the year that prompted the Bank to raise rates in June.

ONS insiders are now privately sceptical Dr Holt will continue to head up the agency next year.

Sir Peter Lloyd MP, chair of the sub-committee which conducted the investigation into the ONS, said: "None of us under-estimate the difficulties Tim Holt faced in pulling together different organisations into the ONS with the budget he had. I think the time to say whether the ONS has good management or not is when it has been given an effective structure. Either the management, the structure or the money haven't produced the dynamism they ought to".

The Bank of England also came in for sharp criticism in the report. The Governor of the Bank last night took the unusual step of formally complaining to the Committee after his deputy came under fire for his role in the earnings fiasco.

The Treasury Committee, chaired by the Labour MP Giles Radice, expressed two key concerns about the role played by the Bank in the earnings mix- up.

Sir Peter said he was "puzzled" the Bank only raised concerns about the earnings figures the day before publication. According to the Committee, the Bank had been aware of the programme of work which led to controversial revisions to the figures for many months.

The Committee also raised concerns about Mr King's involvement in the subsequent Treasury-initiated review .

According to Sir Peter, the Bank was a "disgruntled customer", and, as such, it was inappropriate for Mr King to oversee the review.

In a letter to Mr Radice released last night, Eddie George, Bank governor, argued that the Committee had misunderstood Mr King's role in the review. "It is not clear to me that there is anything inappropriate about this structure or Mervyn King's position,"he said.

Outlook, page 21

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in