►
Description
Published by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body.
www.parliament.scot // We do not facilitate discussions on our YouTube page but encourage you to share and comment on our videos on your own channels. // If you would like to join in our conversations please follow @ScotParl on Twitter or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/scottishparliament
B
She
may
be
more
willing
to
engage
with
the
committee
and
consider
why
we
have
been
pursuing
this
issue
this
issue
for
almost
two
years
now
there
have
been
times
when
I've
wondered
that
too,
as
a
playwright
said,
try
again
fail
again
fail
better.
Why,
then,
a
bill
addressing
this
particular
topic?
Let
me
outline
what
we
are
proposing
to
do
and
why
first
the
why
pre-release
access
or
PRA
is
rather
a
niche
topic,
not
something
we
envisaged
would
occupy
the
time
that
it
has.
So
what
is
it,
and
why
does
it
matter?
B
Pra
is
the
practice
of
making
Statistics
available
to
ministers
and
their
advisers
prior
to
publications.
The
Office
for
National
Statistics
stopped
doing
this
in
July
2017,
the
Bank
of
England,
followed
suit,
and
our
economic
data
report
published
in
February
2018
called
for
an
end
of
PRA
for
four
sets
of
statistics
of
national
importance,
including
GDP
and
GE
RS,
or
this
was
the
majority
view
of
the
committee.
The
minority
opinion,
though
more
cautious
sought
a
presumption
against
priests
and
I
should
also
say.
B
B
B
So
we
pressed
the
Scottish
government
on
the
matter
and
further
correspondence
and
meetings.
The
lengthy
discourse
can
possibly
be
distilled
into
five
words
ministerial
benefit
versus
statistical
integrity.
Now
let
me
elaborate
on
that
a
little
after
which
I
will
come
on
to
the
matter
of
there
being
two
views
among
committee
members.
B
The
standard
argument
for
PRA
is
that
it
is
preferable
for
ministers
to
be
briefed
in
advance,
allowing
them
to
make
sensible
and
informed
comments
at
time
of
publication
and
therefore
say
those
in
favour
the
practices
public
merit
so
far
so
plausible.
The
counter
view
is
that
it
puts
ministers,
whichever
party
is
in
power
in
a
privileged
position,
that
it
allows
the
figures
to
be
framed
in
a
particular
way
or
even
to
be
spun.
C
A
B
The
point
is
that
this
enables
them
to
provide
a
positive
slant
before
anyone
else
can
respond,
therefore,
risking
the
public's
trust
in
the
gravity
of
official
statistics
and
the
majority
view
of
the
committee
sides.
With
that
statistical
integrity.
Side
of
the
argument.
Now
some
colleagues
take
a
different
view
and
I
shall
let
them
speak
for
themselves,
but
I
think
it
is
only
fair
to
say
they
too
would
like
to
see
a
shift
in
the
approach
to
PRA
and
such
is
the
context
of
our
bill
proposal.
B
Allow
me
now
to
outline
what
the
proposed
bill
would
do.
There
are
three
strands:
first,
removal
of
PRA
for
two
specific
categories
of
economic
data;
secondly,
a
phased
approach
to
that
removal
and
review
of
its
impact;
and
thirdly,
reducing
to
one
working
day,
the
PRA
for
those
statistics
where
five
is
currently
the
norm
and
if
I
might
share
the
thinking
behind
each
of
these
before
going
further.
The
first
would
end
PRA
for
two
of
the
four
categories
of
economic
data
we
identified
in
our
original
inquiry.
These
are
GDP
and
retail
sales.
B
Neither
of
these
categories
are
subject
to
PRA
at
a
UK
level,
and
the
Scottish
Government
would
not
be
losing
anything
which
is
retained
by
the
UK
government.
The
second
strand
would
stipulate
that
the
removal
of
PRA
be
phased.
Thus,
one
day
would
be
cut
to
12
hours
after
one
year
then
removed
entirely
after
two
years,
with
an
independent
review
of
the
impact
after
three.
B
This
would
be
laid
before
the
Parliament,
with
ministers
obliged
to
respond
to
his
findings.
The
third
strand
would
reduce
from
five
days
to
one
the
PRA
for
other
economic
statistics
where
five
currently
applies.
As
the
Royal
statistical
society
remarked
of
the
five
days
scenario
during
her
inquiry
and
I
Scotland
is
very
much
an
anomaly
relative
to
almost
the
whole
developed
world.
B
B
But
at
this
point
it
may
also
be
helpful
to
say
what
our
bill
would
not
do.
It
would
not
put
Scottish
Ministers
at
a
disadvantage
to
the
UK
counterparts
or
Whitehall
departments,
because
the
statistics
we
focus
on
GDP
and
retail
sales
are
in
the
gift
of
the
ons
and
hence
not
subject
to
PRA.
It
would
not
legislate
for
any
data
other
than
those
categories
of
economic
statistics
specified.
B
It
would
not
cover
health
or
education
stance,
for
example,
and
it
would
not
question-
and
indeed
we
do
not
question
the
integrity
of
Scottish
statisticians
as
the
UK
Statistics
Authority,
who
are
the
guardians
of
the
independence
of
official
statistics,
told
us
and
I
quote:
they
are
genuinely
Hughley,
/,
hugely
very
highly
professional
statisticians
who
do
an
excellent
job.
I
just
think
that
pre-release
access
makes
their
work
harder.
So
how
is
PRA
viewed
by
the
wider
statistical
community,
the
Royal
statistical
Society,
supports
an
end
to
it.
The
ons
supports
an
end
to
it.
B
They
already
mentioned
UK
statistics
authority
supports
an
end
to
it.
Professor
Sir
Charles
Bean,
who
led
the
2016
independent
review
of
economic
data,
supports
an
end
to
it.
John
Pillinger,
the
recently
retired
UK
national
statistician,
supports
an
end
professor
C
in
diamond.
The
list
goes
on.
His
successor
supports
an
end
to
it.
In
fact,
the
former
principal
of
Aberdeen
University
co-signed
a
letter
to
The
Times
in
May
2017,
a
letter
which
described
Pyare
as
quote
outdated
and
unnecessary
and
quote
detrimental
to
public
trust.
B
Here
we
are
more
than
a
decade
on,
and
the
direction
of
travel
has
moved
even
further
away
from
PRA
and
I'm
afraid
to
say.
The
Scottish
government
finds
itself
on
the
wrong
side
of
this
argument,
but
it
can
of
course,
always
change
that
it
was
the
American
poet
Ogden
Nash,
who
said
people
have
who
have
what
they
want
are
fond
of
telling
people
who
haven't
what
they
want,
that
they
really
don't
want.
It.
I
can
repeat
that
because
it
might
be
helpful
for
other
members.
B
People
who
have
what
they
want
are
fond
of
telling
people
who
haven't
what
they
want,
that
they
really
don't
want
it.
So
call
me
an
optimist
if
you
will,
but
after
19
months
of
trying
and
failing
I,
remain
hopeful,
we
can
make
some
progress
today.
Our
premise
is
simple:
we
believe
statistics
to
be
a
public
asset.
They
should
be
an
aid
to
understanding
the
political
and
macroeconomic
decisions
that
affect
us
all
and,
as
such,
the
numbers
should
be
available
on
an
equal
and
not
a
privileged
basis.
C
Presiding
officer
now
as
much
as
I
love
talking
about
detail,
look
forward
to
and
the
debate
this
afternoon.
I
do
think
it's
remarkable
that
this
is
there,
as
the
convener
said,
is
a
second
debate
on
this
issue,
and
I
would
think
that
perhaps
that
are
more
pressing
issues
facing
the
economy.
Right
now
then
I'm
having
a
second
debate
on
this
issue,
and
if
the
committee
takes
forward
legislation
and
the
time
and
effort-
that's
involved
in
that,
but
that
is
of
course,
the
committee's
choice
and,
in
the
meantime,
I
look
forward
to
a
debate.
Yes,.
B
C
The
convener
mentioned
the
cabinet
secretary
did
put
forward
an
alternative
proposal
which
would
have
been
the
pragmatic
approach
that
the
committee
has
referenced.
That
would
retain
pub
confidence
in
economic
statistics
and
provides
Scottish
and
UK
ministers
were
limited
and
tightly
controlled
at
pyaari
and,
as
has
been
mentioned,
and
I
want
to
want
to
have
a
layout
that
the
wider
context,
and
then
perhaps
in
my
summing
up
note
and
address
specific
points
that
have
been
raised
by
members.
But
pre-released
access
is
the
norm.
C
Uk
government
departments
have
kept
pre-release
access
with
only
the
ons
removing
this
and
the
oil
s
quite
differently
from
the
chief
statistician,
sits
at
arm's
length
from
government.
But
what
I
wanted
to
make
clear
at
the
outset
is
that
there
is
nothing
inappropriate
about
pre-release
access
to
official
statistics
and
it's
in
line
with
legislation.
People
receive
an
early
access
if
the
person
responsible
for
producing
the
statistics
considers
it
necessary
and
legitimate.
It's
not
contrary
to
the
code
of
practice
for
statistics,
and
it
is
standard
practice.
That's
not
limited
to
Ministers
so,
for
example,
yeah.
C
D
You
very
much
just
on
the
minister's
contention
that
the
government's
following
standard
practice
evidence
given
by
the
royal
statistic
Society
said
that
Scotland
is
very
much
an
anomaly
relative
to
the
whole
of
the
world
when
it
comes
to
pre-release
access.
Does
she
not
recognize
that
evidence?
Mr.
C
I
I
did
look
at
the
evidence
that
was
given
and
it's
very
valuable
and
valid
evidence.
I
repeat
the
point
that,
since
the
awareness
ended
pyaari
to
their
statistics
over
a
year
ago,
only
the
Bank
of
England
has
full
suit.
Whitehall
departments
still
operate
with
24
hours
pyaari
as
per
the
English
pyaari
order.
C
Of
course,
if
the
committee
legislates,
they
will
be
ending
that
independence
that
is
currently
enjoyed
by
this
chief
statistician,
and
my
understanding
is
that
at
the
UK
government
they
still
have
not
legislated
on
pyaari.
It
was
a
decision
taken
by
the
ONS,
which
is
an
arm's
length
organization
to
change
the
way
that
they
operate
now.
C
We
are
clear
about
our
responsibilities
around
data
and
statistics,
and
we
have
a
long-standing
position
that
the
decision-making
and
the
responsibilities
of
statistical
matters,
including
pre-release
access,
is
fundamentally
for
the
professionals
and
that,
in
this
case,
is
Scotland's
chief
statistician.
Now
we're
not
legally
obliged
to
adopt
that
position.
C
We've
made
that
call
the
advice
of
the
professionals
who
produce
official
statistics
based
on
their
professional
experience,
is
to
have
tightly
controlled
pre-release
access
as
Pere
the
legislation,
in
other
words,
having
PRA,
is
an
important
part
of
the
official
statistics
system,
but
we
recognize
that
that
comes
with
responsibility
and
one
of
the
first
myths
I
want
to
dispel
that
the
convener
was
pursuing
in
his
opening
remarks
is
the
idea
that
pre-release
access
to,
for
example,
GDP
statistics,
gives
Scottish
Ministers
a
first
mover
advantage.
It's
simply
not
the
case,
and
it
misses
entirely
the
point
there.
C
Others
from
the
scotland
office
as
one
example
get
that
early
access
to
GDP
statistics
as
well.
We
believe
that
those
in
authority
are
with
a
responsibility
for
a
policy
area
that
is
of
yes,
I'll,
just
finish
the
sentence
and
I.
Well,
we
believe
that
those
in
authority
are
those
with
a
responsibility
for
a
policy
area
that
is
of
national
importance,
can
talk
about
the
new
information,
with
understanding
with
depth
and
with
accuracy
when
they
are
asked
to
do
so,
as
they
always
will
be.
When
those
statistics
are
published,
yeah
Thank.
E
C
Be
the
case
I
recognize
it
would
be
the
case,
but
what
I'm
trying
to
dispel
is
somehow
that
Scottish
Ministers
are
the
only
ones
with
access
and
can
then
use
the
statistics
or
misuse
statistics
in
that
way.
They
are
unable
to
do
so
because
there
is
the
there's
access
em
to
others
as
well,
but
you're
right
and
it's
a
point.
I
will
make
now
that
if
this
legislation
goes
ahead,
then
the
implication
and
the
consequences
will
not
just
be
for
Scottish
Ministers.
It
will
be
further
Scotland
office
and
for
the
Treasury
as
well.
C
F
If
you've
seen
that
mr.
Kois
office
and
and
and
this
Scottish
government
should
have
this
privileged
access,
then
why
why
would
you
deny
this
the
legislature
in
Scotland
the
same
access
that
that's
fundamentally
there
should
here?
Why?
What
makes
the
executive
more
accountable,
more
powerful
than
the
legislature
Minister.
C
And
the
second
point
is
that
nobody
is
denying
access
to
those
statistics
and
from
legislature
and
those
that
legislate
or
the
general
public
all
will
have
access.
The
point
I'm
making
is
that
PRA
enables
us
to
make
a
far
more
informed
comment
when
something
is
published
than
just
a
knee-jerk
response.
C
But
everybody
has
access
to
those
statistics
as
soon
as
they
are
published,
as
I
draw
echoes
because
I'm
going
overtime
and
I
will
just
probably
close
em
with
that
that,
with
a
whole
different
group
of
issues
facing
the
Scottish
economy,
just
now,
whether
that's
a
disorganized,
EU
exit
or
anything
else.
This
Parliament
needs
to
devote
its
focus
and
its
energies
and
doing
all
it
can
to
support
and
protect
the
people,
industries
and
reputation
of
Scotland
and
I.
Look
forward
to
working
with
the
economy
committee
to
do
that.
D
Let
me
start
by
adding
my
thanks
to
the
the
clerking
team
spice
and
the
witnesses
who
contributed
to
this
valuable
inquiry.
I
will
address
the
specific
issue
of
pre-release
access
shortly,
but
the
wider
bite
drop
to
this
debate.
Our
increasing
concerns
over
the
level
of
transparency
and
governance
under
this
SNP
government.
Just
this
weekend
there
were
reports
that
the
Scottish
government
has
refused
to
reveal
details
of
how
130
million
pounds
of
taxpayers
money
has
been
invested
under
the
Scottish
growth
scheme,
refusing
to
answer
Freedom
of
Information
requests.
D
This
comes
on
top
of
widespread
concerns
recently
over
the
level
and
accuracy
of
information
provided
by
the
Scottish
government
in
relation
to
the
crisis
at
Ferguson
marine.
This
should
come
as
no
surprise
from
a
government
that
was
criticized
by
his
own
information
commissioner
last
year
for
secretive
and
biased
responses
to
Freedom
of
Information
requests
from
the
media
and
opposition
parties.
Yes,
will
John
Mason
with.
D
Part
of
this
debate,
which
I'll
come
on
to
is
to
align
the
approach
of
the
Scottish
government
to
pre-release
access
to
the
best
practice
followed
by
the
UK
government
and
that's
the
whole
point.
We
are
having
this
debate,
so
this
is
an
SNP
government
that
says
it
has
the
most
open,
far-reaching
freedom
of
information
laws
in
the
UK,
but,
as
we
know
in
reality,
that
is
very
different
indeed,
and
these
concerns
about
open
governance
and
transparency
are
reflected
in
the
debate
we're
having
today
today.
D
The
fight
is
the
Scottish
government
continues
to
insist
on
having
pre-release
access
to
vital
economic
statistics,
something
inconsistent
with
international
best
practice,
transparent
government
and
democratic
accountability
and
fairness,
and
that
Alex
Riley
absolutely
rightly
said
the
ability
of
this
Parliament
to
hold
the
government
to
account
by
having
access
to
information.
At
the
same
time,
the
reality
is
the
pre-release
access
gives
the
Scottish
government
24
hours
or
longer
to
spin
a
story
around
key
economic
figures,
no
matter
how
bad
they
are.
D
This
means
that
whenever
the
information
is
released
to
the
public
headlines
are
already
dominated
by
the
spin
put
out
by
the
Scottish
government.
For
example,
the
news
yesterday
that
Scotland's
economy
is
close
to
recession
was
dominated
by
S&P
spin.
That
brexit
was
to
blame,
which
is
a
bit
of
an
odd
excuse,
given
that
the
rest
of
the
UK
economy
also
subject
to
the
same
breaks
that
uncertainty
is
growing
at
almost
twice
the
rate
of
Scotland
presiding
officer.
D
The
Scottish
Conservatives
will
support
the
economy
committee's
proposal
for
a
committee
bill
to
equalize
access
to
vital
economic
statistics.
The
committee
is
acting
because
the
Scottish
Government
has
refused
to
do
so
and
has
refused
to
listen
to
overwhelming
evidence
that
pre-release
access
is
contrary
I.
Let
me
finish
this
point.
Please.
Pre-Release
access
is
contrary
to
a
EU
statistic,
code
of
practice
and
the
United
Nations
fundamental
principles
of
official
statistics.
I'll
give
away.
C
D
Think
the
ability
of
Parliament
to
have
equal
access
to
information
and
to
hold
the
Scottish
government
account
is
a
an
important
component
of
what
needs
to
be
looked
at.
The
economy
committee
heard
compelling
evidence
from
a
range
of
witnesses.
I
won't
report,
I'll,
repeat
everything
that
the
convener
set
out,
but
the
UK
Statistics
Authority
made
it
clear
when
it
said
this
is
an
important
issue.
Why
do
we
care
so
much
about
it?
It's
because
at
the
heart
of
what
statistics
are
about,
they
are
a
public
asset.
D
Pre-Released
runs
against
this
principle
and
also
as
Gordon
Lyndhurst
highlighted,
the
Royal
statistical
Society
commented
that
five-day
pre-release
access
to
data
is
very
much
an
anomaly
relative
to
almost
the
whole
developed
world.
Let
me
quote
another
evidence
which
was
provided
by
a
witness.
We
believe
that
privileged
access
undermines
public
trust
in
official
statistics.
This
creates
opportunities
for
figures
to
be
spun
to
the
media
or
buried
beneath
other
announcements.
Despite
this
evidence,
the
Cabinet
Secretary
has
refused
to
recognise
that
the
Scottish
government
is
out
of
line
with
international
based
practice
in
response
to
the
cabinet.
D
Secretary's
refusal
to
listen
to
this
evidence.
The
economy
committee
has
set
forth
proposals
which
are
straightforward
and
represent
a
compromise.
There
are
three
strands
to
the
committee's
proposed
bill:
first,
removal
of
pre-release
access
entirely
for
two
categories
of
economic
data,
GDP
and
retail
sales
index.
Neither
of
those
are
covered
by
pre-release
access
at
the
UK
level.
Secondly,
a
phased
approach
and
an
independent
review
of
the
impact
of
that
removal.
This
was
discussed
at
committee.
D
The
idea
being
that
this
will
this
gradual
approach
and
under
review
will
offer
accountability
in
relation
to
the
changes
we
are
proposing.
And
thirdly,
we
are
seeking
to
reduce,
from
five
days
to
one
working
day,
the
pre-release
access
for
economic
statistics
we're
currently
the
Scottish
Government
has
five
working
days
access.
This
would
include
exports,
productivity
and
domestic
non-domestic
rates.
These
committees
will
go
some
way
to
bring
Scotland
into
line
with
rest
of
the
UK
and
indeed
the
rest,
sorry,
the
rest
of
the
world.
D
The
minister
mentioned
that
in
the
Scottish
government
evidence
given
to
the
committee,
it
argued
that
the
ONS
was
a
bit
of
an
outlier.
Its
approach
is
unusual
in
that
no
other
UK
government
departments
have
indeed
creed
release
access.
I
think
this
misses
the
point
with
respect.
The
point
is
the
ons
is
the
gatekeeper
of
key
economic
statistics
and
they
gave
up
the
right
to
create
release
access,
and
that
is
the
scope
of
this
bill.
It
is
limited
to
vital
economic
statistics.
D
It
does
not
make
any
other
stipulations
on
any
other
set
of
data
which
are
not
of
which
fall
outside
of
the
economic
figures.
I
have
mentioned
precise
enough,
so
let
me
wrap
up.
The
experts
are
clear.
The
Scottish
Government's
approach
to
pre-release
access
is
out
of
step
with
best
practice
and
the
policies
followed
in
other
OECD
countries
in
the
interest
of
transparent
government
and
democratic
fairness.
It
is
time
to
put
an
end
to
pre-release
access
and
therefore
I
support
the
committee
bill
to
this
end.
Thank
you.
H
You
presiding
officer
and
I
would
also
like
to
thank
the
economy,
energy
and
fieldwork
committee
for
their
investigations
and
to
pre-release
access.
The
Scottish
Labour
Party
will
support
the
committee
bed
to
bring
forward
a
committee
bill
to
address
the
current
anomalies
regarding
pre-release
access
to
statistics.
It's
clear.
The
pre-release
access
puts
government
and
opposition
to
spin
statistics
to
their
best
advantage
and
that
can
cause
confusion
and
undermines
public
trust
in
the
whole
system.
Often,
on
the
day
of
releases,
statistics
would
get
commentary
from
government
that
puts
a
gloss
on
those
statistics.
H
That's
not
reflected
in
the
statistics
themselves,
then,
on
the
following
day
after
opposition
parties,
the
press,
and
indeed
the
rest
of
Scotland,
have
either
look
at
those
statistics.
The
garden
is
not
quite
so
rosy.
Clearly
release
access
happens
with
regard
to
both
devolved,
unreserved
issues
and
PRA
on
reserve
issues
is
not
affected
by
the
bill
that
the
committee
is
proposing,
but
it's
worth
noting
that
they
are
pre
released
a
maximum
of
24
hours
in
advance,
while
some
Scottish
statistics
are
pre,
released,
five
or
even
more
decent
advance
for
those
who
receive
pre-release.
H
The
benefits
are
clear:
they
know
what
is
in
the
report
and
advance
allowing
them
time
to
either
very
bad
news
or
to
spend
the
findings,
and
it
allows
them
also
to
accentuate
good
news
and
mitigate
against
the
bad
for
parliamentarians
and
press.
This
means
that
they're
left
behind
trying
to
access
the
data
while
the
government
is
already
setting
the
scene.
H
If
you
follow
press
coverage
of
some
of
those
data
releases,
you
see
that
in
the
media
in
the
day
they
are
released
and
they
are
highlighting
what
is
good
about
the
statistics
and
what
the
government
wants
to
highlight
and
the
day
after
they
are
much
less
positive
and
and
the
the
minister
did
say
that
it's
the
case.
That
government
are
often
asked
to
comment
very
quickly
on
those
statistics.
But
what
is
happening
at
the
moment
as
the
government
have
their
comment
prepared
and
it
leads
to
mixed
messages
and
public
confusion.
H
It
undermines
public
confidence
and
how
can
the
public
believe
what
they're
being
told
when
the
same
statistics
are
giving
very
different
stories
and
very
on
different
days,
and
then
PRA
would
mean
that
are
more
realistic
and
analysis
of
statistics
is
in
the
public
domain.
At
the
same
time,
people
can
clearly
see
the
pros
and
cons
together
and
be
much
better
informed.
As
a
result,
the
committee
expressed
a
view
back
in
2017
the
pre
release.
Our
access
of
economic
statistics
to
the
Scottish
Government
she
gained,
however,
has
been
made
clear
by
the
Scottish
government.
H
They
are
not
going
to
act
on
that
recommendation
unless
instigated
a
second
committee
report
that
proposes
the
committee
bill
to
end
PRA
and
the
legislation
is
not
in
stopping
all
PRA.
Its
purport
is
actually
proposing
as
a
modest
change,
as
stated
by
others,
that
there
three
stat
strands
to
the
bill,
the
removal
of
PRA
entirely
only
for
two
specific
categories
of
Statistics
and
mapped
himself,
would
be
faced
and
would
be
independently
reviewed
and
reducing
from
five
working
days
to
one
working
day.
H
The
PRA
for
economic
statistics
for
five
working
days
is
currently
the
maximum,
and
this
would
pull
a
Scottish
apiary
into
line
with
the
rest
of
the
UK
and
as
I
understand.
This
part
is
not
disputed
by
the
Scottish
government,
but
the
fact
that
you
would
need
to
legislated
for
it
for
legislate,
for
it
is
and
I
don't
quite
understand
why
that
can't
be
and
tried
in
legislation
specifically.
A
C
A
H
I
H
Are
neither
can
I
say,
or
the
committee
recommending
and
I
think
this
needs
to
be
made
clear,
that
to
the
to
end
pre-release,
where
it
is
not
ended
for
UK
government.
Indeed,
that
would
continue
and
the
action
would
bring
the
Scottish
government
in
line
with
best
practice
aim
you
best
practice,
which
does
not
agree
with
PRA
at
all,
and
it
should
also
be
noted
that
the
Bank
of
England
and
the
Office
of
National
Statistics
have
both
ended.
Pra
the
Royal
statistics.
All
society
is
a
written
submission
to
the
committee
stated.
H
I
mean
it's
important,
I
think
and
what
was
underlined
by
the
committee
that
this
move
is
important
to
build
public
trust
and
make
sure
that
Trust
is
retained
in
statistics
in
the
UK
Statistics
Authority
in
their
report
in
called
pre-release
access
of
official
status,
a
review
of
the
statutory
arrangements
stated.
We
believe
that
would
be
in
the
public
interest
of
all
UK
administration's
amended
their
secondary
legislation
to
adopt
a
maximum
period
of
three
release:
access
of
three
hours,
which
is
a
shorter
period
than
the
norm.
H
A
three
hour
limit
was
also
really
recommended
by
the
House
of
Commons
tragedy
committee
in
2006.
So
this
goes
back.
Some
time
is
therefore
clear
that
the
authorities,
own
statistics
and
the
release
are
in
favor
of
ending
pre-release,
so
I
I.
We
support
the
committee
position
that
33
be
legislated
for,
albeit
in
a
very
modest
bill,
but
I
in
them
pre-release
and
possibly
moving
eventually
to
the
whole.
In
the
previous.
J
Thank
you
very
much
presiding
officer
and
I
want
to
begin
by
expressing
regret
that
we're
having
this
debate
I
mean
the
committee's
the
economic
data
inquiry
focused
on
a
wide
range
of
matters,
and
the
only
contentious
recommendation
was
around
pre-release.
Access
to
statistics.
What's
frustrating
is
that
this
is
not
a
new
issue,
so
back
in
August
2008,
the
gen
then
Minister
mr.
Jim
Mather.
J
Now
the
same
statistics
authority
carried
a
review
of
pre
release
in
2010
and
they
clearly
stated
it
would
be
in
the
public
interest.
As
Rhoda
Grant
said,
if
all
UK
administrations
amended
their
secondary
legislation
to
adopt
a
maximum
period
of
privilege
of
three
errors
hours
with
the
shorter
period
as
the
norm
and
as
we've
heard
since
then,
the
ONS
has
ended
all
24-hour
pre-release
access,
as
has
the
Bank
of
England
resigning.
J
First,
in
response
to
the
committee's
report,
Keith
Brown,
the
then
cabinet
secretary,
dodged
the
recommendation
completely
in
his
response,
passing
the
buck
to
the
chief
statistician
to
respond
on
the
question
of
pre
release.
This
was
spectacularly
inappropriate,
given
that
the
chief
statistician
is
the
person
to
whom
power
is
given
by
the
2008
Act
order
to
authorize
pre-release
access.
His
successor,
Derek
Mackay
in
a
letter
of
10th
July
2018,
maintained
this
distance,
claiming
that
the
question
remains
under
the
purview
of
the
chief
statistician
and
that
mr.
J
Mackay
didn't
feel
appropriate
for
him
to
add
anything
further
in
October
2018.
Mr.
Mackay
repeated
the
assertion
that
fundamentally,
this
was
an
issue
for
the
chief
statistician,
presiding
officer.
This
is
misconceived
the
issue
before
us,
then,
and
now
is
whether
it
is
right
or
appropriate
as
a
matter
of
law
that
the
chief
statistician
be
given
such
powers
to
authorize
pre
release
for
up
to
5
working
days,
and
our
argument
with
the
government
is
about
what
the
law
should
say
now
in
response
to
the
committee's
proposals.
J
Direct
proposals,
Derek
Mackay,
then
takes
an
entirely
contradictory
position
in
his
letter
to
the
convener
of
20th
May
2019.
He
maintains
that
pre-release
access
is
a
matter
for
the
chief
statistician,
but
he
then
goes
on
in
the
next
breath
to
suggest
that
he,
the
Minister,
will
tell
the
chief
statistician
that
the
Minister
will
require
only
one
working
day,
PRA
for
economic
statistics.
J
Now,
if
the
independence
of
the
chief
statistician
is
so
important,
and
the
ministers
refer
to
this
in
at
least
two
occasions
at
this
afternoon,
that
it
prevented
ministers
from
even
respond
to
the
committee's
previous
proposals,
what
on
earth
makes
the
finance
secretary
suddenly
feel
able
to
tell
the
chief
statistician
that
he
requires
certain
actions
to
be
taken
and
that's
precisely
why
we
need
an
updated
order
because
presiding
officer
of
this
proposal,
tea
is
not
about
this
government.
It's
not
about
the
last
government.
J
J
And
who
should
authorize
it
and
enforce
circumstances,
and
these
are
precisely
the
matter
set
out
in
the
pre-release
access
to
official
statistics,
order,
2008
or
8,
and
they
are
precisely
the
matters
the
committee's
been
concerned
with
they're,
precisely
the
matters
that
many
most
people,
all
people,
in
fact,
giving
evidence
to
the
committee
have
suggested-
should
be
dealt
with
by
ending
pre-release.
There
are
the
matters
that
this
debate
is
about
today.
J
These
are
the
matters
that
ministers
should
pay
far
closer
attention
to,
and
these
are
the
matters
that
members
here
this
afternoon
should
pay
careful
attention
to
presiding
officer.
A
government
spokesman
is
quoted
in
The
Herald
newspaper
today
as
follows:
I
quote,
pre-release
access
is
consistent
with
a
code
of
practice
for
Statistics,
which
states
that
should
be
in
line
with
the
rules
and
principles
set
and
legislation.
As
a
statement
noting
that
government
is
basically
saying
we
need
to
abide
by
the
law.
Well,
of
course,
they
do
they're
quoted
further.
J
Indeed,
UK
government
departments
provide
pre-release
access
to
the
statistics
in
a
similar
way
to
the
Scottish
Government.
That's
nonsense!
That
is
rubbish.
The
UK
pre-release
order
grants
PA
for
a
maximum
of
24
hours
not
five
days,
and
then
the
statement
goes
on
three
release
access
as
a
matter
for
the
chief
statistician
and
the
independence
of
his
role
is
crucial.
J
Any
proposal
to
curtail
access
would
cut
across
his
ability
to
ensure
the
key
figures
about
Scott
on
the
property
community
and
understood
another
meaningless
statement
and
a
completely
erroneous
statement,
because,
of
course
the
Minister
is
telling
the
chief
statistician
what
to
do
in
response
to
our
report
and
in
order
to
avoid
the
need
to
introduce
other
secondary
legislation
so
presiding
officer,
the
committee's
proposal
does
not
even
go
as
far
as
the
recommendations
of
experts.
It
doesn't
even
go
as
far
as
the
committee's
own
recommendations
in
its
economic
data
report.
This
is
such
a
modest
proposal.
J
No
member,
far
less
a
government
minister.
She
does
any
difficulty
supporting
it
if
they
believe
in
good
governance,
news
apparently,
and
the
way
to
do
it
is
actually
for
the
minister
to
introduce
a
statutory
instrument
that
we
demand
in
a
very,
very
modest
way,
the
2008
order
it
would
fly
through
the
committee.
J
I
can't
speak
for
other
members,
but
I'm
pretty
sure
if
it
satisfied
the
committee's
recommendations
in
the
report,
the
committee
would
have
no
problem
with
it,
so
all
I
say
to
the
cabinet
to
the
minister
this
afternoon,
ministers
are
very
fond
of
coming
to
the
chamber
and
telling
us
all
how
this
or
that
policy
is
world.
Leading
this
one
certainly
is
not,
and
so
the
most
sensible
thing
to
do
is
to
concede
that
pre-release
access
is
not
best
practice
to
follow
the
advice
and
recommendations
of
the
country's
leading
statistics
experts
and
to
commit
and
privilege.
K
You
presiding
officer,
the
committee
report
of
the
6th
of
June
highlights
the
three
strands
that's
being
proposed
for
the
committee
of
L,
a
bill
which
I
am
yet
to
be
convinced,
is
necessary
or
required.
We've
heard
the
earlier
from
God
and
Len
toast,
where
the
three
strands
out
of
the
bill
and
I
will
highlight
my
reasons
for
why
this
should
probably
go.
No
further
stir.
A
J
K
The
cabinet
secretary,
the
last
meeting
he
appeared
on
us,
highlighted
what
he
thought
was
a
way
for
which
we
could
all
agree
with
so
strand.
One
is
the
removal
of
pre-release
access
for
two
specific
categories
of
economic
statistics.
Much
has
been
made
of
the
decision
of
the
ONS
in
2017
and
the
report.
States
ons
ended
all
24-hour
pre-release
access
for
its
official
statistics,
but
is
that
really
the
case?
K
The
Bank
of
England
immediately
applied
for
pre-release
access
for
specific
ons
economic
statistics
and
thus
was
granted
and
that
PRA
access
has
been
reviewed
every
year
since,
including
to
the
end
of
this
year?
The
letter
from
the
Bank
of
England
to
who
and
a
stated
the
10th
of
June
2019,
asked
the
pre-release
access
period,
be
increased,
an
order.
The
statistics
shed
for
released
on
the
18th
of
June
there's
a
list
on
the
14th
to
them
four
days
early.
K
The
letter
then
request
further
brought
forward
three
release
dates
in
September
and
December
2019.
The
committee
report
points
out
that
the
ons
approach
is
unusual
and
that
no
other
UK
departments
have
followed
that
example
and
did
a
review
paper
produced
by
the
UK
government
Cabinet
Office.
At
the
time
of
the
last
review
highlighted,
there
was
almost
universal
rejection
of
the
idea
of
removing
pre-release
access
altogether
and
of
reducing
it
to
a
maximum
of
three
errors.
K
Over
90%
of
ministerial
private
offices,
over
80%
of
press
offices
over
90%
of
senior
officials
and
about
three-quarters
of
officials
who
produced
briefs
had
strong
objections
to
the
idea
of
eliminating
privileged
access
altogether.
As
they
pointed
a
pre-release
access
is
important
for
good
government,
avoiding
mass
reporting
in
the
media
and
help
spotting
mistakes.
This
view
is
backed
up
by
the
fact
that
sends
the
or
initiative
PRA
back
in
2017,
not
one
of
the
30
government
departments
or
agencies
operating
across
the
UK
have
followed
the
ons
example.
K
Not
one
of
them
have
removed
PRA
from
the
publication's
and
continue
to
issue
an
excess
of
a
thousand
statistical
releases
each
year
there
has
also
been
no
new
your
legislation
and
a
serie
passed
by
the
UK
government
since
2008
our
combat
astride.
Two
nomina,
but
strength,
suggest
PRS
should
be
reduced
from
five
days
to
24
hours.
For
those
economic
statistics
of
five
working
days
is
currently
the
maximum
the
cabinet
secretary
for
finance
economy.
K
In
fieldwork
and
a
letter
dated
the
20th
of
May
to
the
committee
and
a
spirit
of
compromise
stated
he
will
accept
a
reduction
from
five
working
days
to
one
day
for
those
economic
statistics
for
five
working
days
is
currently
the
maximum
and
a
further
letter
to
the
Committee
on
the
24th
of
me,
Derek
Mackay
pointed
out
that
you
were
aware
that
he,
the
chief
statistician,
has
already
taken
the
decision
to
restrict
pre-release
access
to
a
maximum
of
24
hours
for
key
economic
statistics.
The
compact
is
tied
to
that
suggest.
K
That
should
be
a
review
to
assess
the
impact
of
the
reduction.
The
Scottish
Government
and
is
later
to
the
committee
of
the
24th
of
May,
said
that
a
chief
statistician
will
review
the
impact
of
my
proposed
changes
once
they've
been
Betty.
Then,
if
he's
consent
content
with
how
things
are
operating,
then
he
can
ensure
that
changes
are
permanent.
K
One
area
that
the
committee
report
fails
to
tackle
as
the
independence
of
the
chief
statistician
pre-release
access
in
Scotland
comes
under
the
pre-release
access.
The
official
start,
Scotland
order,
2008
Scottish
Ministers
decided
to
place
the
decision-making
around
PRA
and
the
hands
of
statisticians
and
formalized
the
framework
in
which
they
work,
which
includes
appropriate
safeguards
to
reduce
the
risks
associated
with
PRA.
By
proposing
the
sky
material.
Are
we
as
politicians
introducing
an
element
of
political
interference
and
an
area
that
has
preserved
his
civil
servants?
K
I
would
have
thought
that
Parliament
would
be
an
agreement
that
pre-release
access
as
a
martyr
for
the
chief
statistician
and
that
the
independence
of
his
role
is
crucial,
presiding
officer
Scotland's,
facing
a
cliff
edge
director.
According
to
UK
government
own
papers
will
see
increased
energy
prices,
food
shortages,
pray,
sakes,
medicines,
shortages,
impacts,
unemployment,
but
any
loss
of
markets
for
a
fashion
industry
due
to
delays
at
polls
to
number
a
few
areas.
I'm
dismayed
that
the
economy
Committee,
given
a
crisis
we
face
with
pranks
one
entire
parliamentary
time,
legislating
an
order.
K
A
couple
of
starts
of
not
released
24
hours.
The
early,
the
chief
statistician,
has
already
limited
all
economic
statistics
to
24
hours.
What
a
committee
asked
for
the
Cabinet
Secretary
has
agreed.
That
review
should
take
place,
something
the
committee
asked
for
leaving
the
remains
of
a
proposed
Bell
that
would
be
so
narrow
in
focus
that
I
believe
it
would
not
be
a
good
use
of
parliamentary
time,
as
I
said
at
the
beginning,
I'm,
yet
to
be
convinced
whether
a
committee
bill
is
either
necessary
or
required
by.
A
L
You
presiding
officer,
I
could
make
mine
very
short
by
saying
I
could
just
say
what
Andy
Whiteman
said,
which
I've
never
said
them
before
I
think
and
in
this
place
in
terms
of
their
content.
I
also
think
them
that
just
taking
up
the
appointment,
Minister
said
about
first
mover
I
mean
information,
has
a
time
value
and
I.
L
Think
anybody
who
has
an
information
before
somebody
else
just
has
an
advantage
in
circumstance
like
that
anyway,
to
get
back
to
the
main
part
of
my
my
speech
so
as
mentioned
by
my
colleagues,
previous
approval
is
the
practice
of
making
official
statistics
and
the
written
commentary
that
accompanies
them
available
in
advance
of
publication
to
specific
individuals
not
involved
in
their
production.
Those
issuing
the
statistics
may
grant
pre-release
to
an
eligible
person,
and
in
most
cases
that
includes
government
ministers
and
officials
who
advise
them
an
interest
of
clarity.
L
L
The
remit
of
the
committee
in
exploring
this
issue
was
to
examine
the
accuracy,
utility
and
comprehensibility
of
Scottish
economic
statistics
to
consider
what
data
is
required
for
effect
of
delivery
and
scrutiny
of
policy
and
to
recommend
what
any
improvements
might
be
made
in
carrying
out
the
committee's
remit.
A
number
of
arguments
both
for
and
against
PRA
have
been
considered,
for
example,
positions
in
favour
of
pre
release.
Access
outlined,
concerns
of
Ministers
must
be
properly
briefed
ahead
of
having
to
make
a
comment
at
the
time
statistics
were
published.
L
This
is
because
ministers
are
formally
accountable
for
the
statistics
released,
whereby
the
practice
of
pre
release
allows
ministers
ample
time
to
understand
the
statistics
in
question
and
their
broader
impacts
on
ministerial
portfolios.
The
example
that
the
pre-release
access
to
official
statistics,
a
review
of
the
statutory
arrangements
document
published
in
March
2010,
made
the
case
that
there
was
widespread
expectation
that
ministers
should
comment
immediately
when
statistics
are
published
and
commanded
a
central
principle
of
good
statistical
practice
through
the
Equality
of
access.
L
The
review
also
recommended
that
it
would
be
in
the
public
interest
of
all
UK
administration's
amended,
their
secondary
legislation
to
adopt
a
maximum
period
of
pre-release
access
from
3
hours
with
a
shorter
period
as
the
norm.
This
position
was
supported
by
stakeholders,
include
the
Bank
of
England
royal
statistical
society
and
the
the
UK
Statistics
Authority
board,
and
the
Office
for
National
Statistics,
which
ended
all
24
hour.
L
Pre-Release
access
for
its
official
statistics
on
1
July
2017,
the
national
statistician
wrote
to
the
chair
of
the
UK
statistics
authority
board,
stating
that
and
I
quote,
on
the
basis
of
all
information
now
available
to
me.
I
consider
that
the
public
benefit
likely
to
result
from
pre-release
access
to
ons.
Statistics
is
outweighed
by
the
detriment
to
public
trust
and
no
statistics
likely
to
result
from
such
access.
L
While
there
are
arguments
both
for
and
against
PRA,
it
is
my
belief,
as
recommended
by
the
economy
committee,
that
this
practice
should
end.
This
is
at
odds
with
the
SNP
his
position.
The
previous
cabinet
secretary
stated
that
the
current
arrangements
worked
well
with
the
pre-release
access
to
data,
allowing
ministers
to
respond
quickly
to
start
stats
at
the
time
of
publication
in
an
informed
way.
L
G
Thank
you
very
much
presiding
officer,
I'm
delighted
to
speak
in
this
debate.
As
members
may
know,
I
was
the
vice
convener
of
the
economy
committee.
When
we
did
this
work,
but
I've
now
been
promoted
to
the
Finance
Committee,
we
we
are
in
a
situation
where
there's
a
lot
more
openness
throughout
society
than
there
used
to
be.
Freedom
of
information
is
now
much
more
widespread
and
we
have
added
organizations
like
housing
associations
to
foi,
and
maybe
we
will
add
more
organizations
in
future.
G
I
would
also
say
that
Scotland
has
been
good
at
openness
and
I
think
we
would
want
to
be
seen
as
at
the
forefront
of
being
an
open
and
pardon
country.
Therefore,
it
was
not
surprising
that
the
economy
committee
questioned
some
of
the
conventions
of
the
past,
whereby
certain
people
had
access
to
certain
statistics
a
considerable
time
before
others
got
them.
Public
trust
is
a
key
component
of
this
whole
debate.
G
No
one
is
questioning
the
trustworthiness
of
the
statisticians
all
of
the
figures
they
produce,
but
trust
in
politicians
has
reduced
and
what
they
might
be
doing
during
five
days
of
PRA
is
the
challenge
we
are
facing
here.
I
think
we'd
to
accept
that
public
expectations
have
changed
over
the
years
and
people
expect
more
transparency.
Nowadays.
G
This
really
came
to
head
with
the
publication
of
the
committee
report
on
economic
statistics
and
2018
paragraph
230
recommended
PRA
ending
with
the
government
to
set
I
would
do
so.
That
was
the
majority
view.
The
minority
view,
including
myself,
agreed
that
there
should
be
quote
a
presumption
against
priests,
access
unquote,
but
left
room
for
exceptions
for
specific
statistics,
although
I
do
not
want
us
always
to
be
comparing
ourselves
to
the
neighbors.
G
The
reality
is
that
there
have
been
changes
down
south
and
the
Office
of
National
Statistics
ended
all
PRA
in
2017
at
the
recommendation
of
the
UK
statistics.
Authority.
On
the
other
hand,
UK
government
departments
which
produced
statistics
do
still
give
themselves
PRA,
so
there
is
immediately
a
problem
with
comparisons.
Should
we
compare
Scottish
statistics
produced
here
with
the
ons
and
so
abolished
PRA,
or
should
we
compare
with
UK
government
departments
and
so
keep
some
PRA?
G
This
is
further
complicated
by
the
fact
that
some
figures,
which
are
produced
by
the
ons
for
England
and
the
UK,
are
purchased
by
the
Scottish
government
for
Scotland
I.
Suppose
my
own
expectation
was
that
the
government
would
probably
be
willing
to
move
a
bit
in
the
direction
of
more
openness
and
less
pre-release
access
and
I
suspect.
The
committee
might
have
accepted
that.
However,
at
this
point,
both
sides
dug
in
the
government
refused
to
budge,
and
the
committee
considered
whether
to
up
the
ante
by
threatening
a
committee
bill.
G
This
was
a
situation
in
the
14th
of
May
when
the
committee
voted
to
move
towards
a
bill
by
four
to
with
Tom
Mason,
Angela
Constance
and
myself.
Abstaining
no
can
I
say
at
this
point.
I
think
is
a
good
example
of
the
committee
system
in
this
Parliament
working.
Well,
we
each
looked
at
the
evidence,
weighed
up
the
arguments
and
we
did
not
just
fall
along
party
lines.
However,
this
was
when
things
changed
on
the
20th
of
May.
The
government
really
belatedly,
in
my
opinion,
did,
did
agree
to
move
in
the
right
direction.
G
A
good
timing
by
mr.
Mackay
and
offered
offered
to
cut
the
maximum
five
days
PRA
one
day,
I
felt
this
was
really
what
the
committee
had
been
looking
for
all
along.
So
you
will
see
on
page
14
of
the
proposal
report
I
moved
that
we
amend
the
main
report
to
take
account
of
the
government's
change
position.
That
seemed
to
me
to
be
a
reasonable
course
of
action.
G
However,
by
a
majority
of
five
to
four,
the
committee
decided
to
press
ahead
with
publication,
and
now
you
have
the
report
so
overall
I
think
the
committee
was
right
to
use
the
threat
of
the
bill
to
encourage
the
government
to
compromise
and
I
think
the
government
could
have
compromised
earlier.
However,
now
the
government
has
compromised,
there
seems
to
be
much
less
disagreement
between
the
two
sides
and
I.
Do
wonder
if
we
really
do
need
a
bill?
G
However,
trust
in
politics
and
politicians
is
hugely
important
and
if
we
can
do
anything
to
improve
that
trust,
it
has
to
be
worthwhile
and
of
longer-term
benefits,
can
I
just
say
to
the
opposition
parties
that
remember
this
would
apply
to
yourselves
if
you
ever
get
into
government
now,
except
the
Lib
Dems
are
not
even
here,
and
it's
hugely
unlikely
they
will
ever
get
into
government,
but
the
rest
might
think
they
have
an
opportunity.
So
please
do
consider
if
you're
looking
to
support
this
bill.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
I
E
Thank
You
presiding
officer
now
I
know
that
many
colleagues
might
think
that
pre-release
access
to
statistics
is
a
boring
subject
to
debate.
They
would,
of
course
be
entirely
wrong
and
in
the
short
five
minutes
that
I
have
open
to
me,
I
hope
to
convince
them
otherwise
and
before
I
move
to
the
substance
of
the
proposal.
Let
me
tell
the
chamber
that
the
last
time
a
committee
bill
was
taken
forward
in
this
Parliament
by
a
subject.
Committee
was
in
2003,
that
was
the
children
and
young
people's
Commissioner
act.
E
It's
been
16
years
since
we
had
a
subject
committee
bill.
I
have
no
idea
why
that
is
because
it's
not
as
if
there
haven't
been
opportunities
to
do
so,
and
issues
on
which
there
has
been
disagreement
with
government.
So
let
me
remind
members
at
the
time
external
commentators,
at
the
very
start
of
the
Parliament,
considered
that
having
the
ability
to
initiate
legislation
gives
the
committee
and,
by
extension,
the
Parliament
more
teeth.
E
If
the
Scottish
government
really
didn't
want
to
do
something,
and
the
committee
thought
that
there
was
merit
in
it,
then
they
could
do
it
themselves.
So
let
me
turn
to
the
bill
proposal
itself
and
I
won't
rehearse
the
detail,
as
others
have
done
so
already.
But
let
me
say
at
the
outset
that
the
economy
Committee
have
not
arrived
at
this
position
lightly
or
quickly.
We
have
been
back
to
words
and
thoughts.
E
Have
you
heard
you've
heard
that
from
John
Mason,
with
the
cabinet
secretary
and
indeed
I,
think
John
Mason
even
tried
himself
to
find
a
compromise
with
the
cabinet
secretary
without
the
degree
of
success
that
we
imagined
he
would
achieve
so
the
suggested
changes
weren't
as
great
as
we
hope
they
would
be.
But
what
is
before
you
today
is
a
compromise
and
a
pragmatic
approach
from
the
majority
of
the
committee.
Stopping
pre-release
access
to
statistics
is
not
novelty.
It
really
isn't
anything
that
stunningly
new,
the
Office
of
National
Statistics.
Do
it
the
Bank
of
England.
E
Do
it
in
fact,
they've
been
doing
it
for
more
than
two
years
and
the
ceiling
hasn't
fallen
in
the
UK
statistics,
authority
recommended
the
House
of
Commons
public
administrations
and
Constitutional
Affairs
Committee
recommend
it
not
only
them
the
freezer
of
Allender
Institute
in
a
blog
today
recommend
it
so
Charles
been
a
former
member
of
the
monetary
policy
committee
at
the
Bank
of
England
recommends
it.
The
Royal
statistical
Society
believes
it's
absolutely
the
right
thing
to
do
and
would
extend
it
across
all
departments.
In
short,
presiding
officer.
It
is
based
practice.
E
It
is
the
gold
standard
that
they
expect
of
statistics.
It
is
about
transparency
and
trust.
Facts
free
of
spin
at
hum
Fersen,
director-general
of
the
UK
statistics
authority,
summed
it
up
for
me
when
he
talked
about
statistics
being
a
public
asset
that
enables
the
public
to
understand
the
nature
of
the
world,
the
nature
of
policy,
the
nature
of
decisions
that
are
being
made.
He
also
pointed
to
the
importance
of
statistics
being
equally
available
to
all
without
some
having
some
kind
of
privileged
access.
E
So
every
expert
in
this
field
says
n
prerelease
to
economic
statistics,
but
the
Scottish
government.
No,
no,
the
cabinet
secretary
has
only
just
arrived
in
had
he
been
here
for
the
whole
debate.
I
might
have
taken
him,
but
let
me
just
say
to
him:
let
me
just
say
some:
it's
clear
that
the
Scottish
government
are
wiser
than
all
those
experts
in
the
field
and
are
going
to
do
something.
Different
and
I
have
to
say.
They're
sent
these
arguments
a
week.
They
say
we
don't
have
a
problem
such
complacency.
E
They
say
that
ministers
need
time
to
have
this
explained
to
them.
I
actually
think
ministers
are
not
stupid,
people
I
think
they
get
it.
Then
they
say
that
journalists
won't
understand.
I,
think
that
the
problem
might
be
that
journalists
understand
all
too
well
and
let
me
see
to
the
Scottish
government
if
it
is
such
a
minor
issue,
why
don't
you
just
do
it
now?
I
know
the
SNP
love
nation-building.
E
They
love
talking
about
Scotland,
leading
the
UK
and
even
leading
the
world,
and
you
know
presiding
officer,
despite
the
heckling,
from
a
sedentary
position
by
the
cabinet
secretary
I,
like
it
too,
but
in
this
area
they
cannot
surely
be
content
to
be
described
as
secretive
content
to
be
second
based.
In
truth,
they
want
privileged
access
to
the
stats
so
that
they
have
time
to
spin
them.
E
There
is
a
growing
culture
of
secrecy
and
a
lack
of
transparency
in
government
is
not
just
pre-release
access
and
I'm
glad
the
finance
secretary
is
here
because
it's
also
their
failure
to
publish
financial
information
for
10
months
is
deliberate
delays
to
FOI
responses,
and,
let's
not
forget
presiding
officer,
that
the
SNP
has
formed
with
statistics.
They've
had
their
knuckles
rapped
before
by
the
UK
statistics
authority,
but
I'm
not
gonna,
dwell
on
that,
because
I
think
Andy
Whiteman
is
right.
This
isn't
just
about
this
government.
E
I
M
Thank
you
for
saying
no
officer,
I've
actually
only
just
joined
this
committee,
I'm
wondering
if
I've
done
the
right
decision,
I
welcome
the
opportunity
to
contribute
to
economy,
energy
and
fear.
What
committee
debate
and
funeral
is
access
committee,
Bois,
key
element
of
producing
official
statistics
and
ensuring
that
properly
understood
by
stakeholders
in
the
public.
Pre-Release
access
is
clear.
An
integral
part
of
the
Scottish
Statistics
system
and
best
supports
the
same
as
members
know:
pre-release
access,
pyaari,
the
practice
of
making
official
statistics.
The
real
ball
advance
the
publication
to
specific
individuals
not
involved
in
the
production.
M
There's
always
ministers
knowledge
to
make
informed
comets
that
attain
the
figures
are
published.
So
what's
the
problem?
I,
don't
see
a
problem.
Pyaari
in
Scotland
comes
under
the
pre-release.
Access
to
official
statistics
order,
2008
2008
model
order
sets
rules,
principles
going
to
granted
a
pre-release
access
to
official
statistics
in
the
final
form
prior
to
publication
is
made
under
orders
necessity,
legislation,
server,
side
2007,
which
allows
the
Scottish
Ministers
to
set
rules
and
PRD
for
Scottish
to
devolve
statistics.
Pra
is
a
long-standing
practice.
It
has
been
around
since
the
2008
order.
M
The
non-statutory
National
Statistics
Corps
look
like
the
protocol
release
practices
which
is
superseded
by
the
order
set
a
maximum
of
40
point
5
errors
for
market
statistics
and
five
working
days
for
non-market
said
the
sticks.
The
economy
is
in
fear
what
committee
e
fw
carry
the
enquiry.
Antes
economic
data
published
its
findings
in
the
report.
M
Scottish
government
accepted
a
number
of
recommendations
made
by
the
Quebec
in
the
report,
but
did
not
give
us
the
committee's
view
and
removing
prae
can
only
statistics
Quebec
his
recommendation,
where
the
Scottish
Government
to
NPRA
to
you
cannot
discuss
states
which
our
markets
then
stuff,
including
Scottish,
GDP,
the
detail,
sales
and
decks
for
Scotland
quarterly
national
account,
Scotland
government
expenditure
and
revenues.
What's
commonly
known
as
jails
and
say
it
should
be
done
through
aspect
of
ongoing,
extended
correspondence
with
the
convener
Gordon
Lancaster.
M
On
behalf
the
committee,
it
was
not
possible
for
the
Scottish
Government
and
the
committee
to
reach
a
compromise
over
last
recommendation,
so
here
we
are
now
okay,
the
cameras
directive
for
finance
economy
and
fieldwork
look
again.
Twista
may
see
a
compromised
with
the
compromise,
with
the
Scottish
masters
receive
24
spra
economics.
As
are
such
things
clear.
Always,
access
is
still
granted
for
statistics
produced
by
other
UK
government
departments.
President
officer
pre-release
access
is
important
from
statistical
and
technical
point
of
view.
One
of
the
key
policy
objectives
are
pre-release
access
is
to
enable
statisticians
demise.
M
The
release
of
statistical
publications
effectively.
Clearly
success
period
is
used
by
statisticians
to
show
that
loss
you
need
to
comment
in
the
statistics
attained.
Those
statistics
are
released,
can
do
so
no
informed
basis
with
a
mess
representation.
It's
better
for
masters
nice
to
be
involved
in
the
oil
release
of
other
factual
statistics.
Now
to
be
commenting
on
out-of-date
or
incorrect
figures
near
the
publication
time
of
the
statistical
publication,
as
this
would
be
confusing
for
the
public
damage
conference
and
official
statistics.
M
The
public,
Parliament
and
media
expect
ministers
to
be
able
to
respond
to
that.
The
states
when
they're
released
so
they
need
to
be
clued
up
I,
expect
nothing
else.
They
expect
we.
We
expect
ministers
to
be
aware
of
what's
happening,
public
services
for
what
they
are
ultimately
responsible.
We
already
said
no,
no
I've
got
a
knee,
make
progress.
The
districts
place,
consent
of
all
using
the
the
Tory
using
the
Tory
a
usual
a
rebuff.
No
to
test
this
place
cursor
over
a
valiant,
ensuring
that
ministers
response
to
this
test.
M
It's
in
the
form
way
of
a
correct
understanding,
I
believe
that
removing
PRA
would
mean
the
statistics
would
be
have
conserved
or
less
opportunity
in
statisticians
would
have
conservative,
less
opportunity.
10
fullness
ministers,
immediate
reaction,
deer
starts.
Alternatively,
ministers
would
end
up
saying
that
I'm
going
to
comment
and
taller
such
time.
This
had
a
chance
to
consider
the
test
extinct,
advise
the
policy
implications
that
reduces
the
scope
for
discussion
and
debate
the
officer.
M
N
Thank
you
very
much
presiding
officer
and
can
I
start
by
congratulating
those
in
the
public
gallery
who
have
stayed
the
course
stuck
stuck
with
it
when
I
was
allocated
speaking
slot
in
this
I
realized
that
Gordon
winters
would
be
opening
the
debate
and
I
would
have
to
listen
to
mr.
Lyndhurst
dulcet
tones
for
over
10
minutes.
N
Naturally
enough,
my
heart
sank,
but
he
has
he
had.
He
did
rather
exceed
himself
and
gave
one
of
his
Whittier
performances,
thought
Andy,
Whiteman,
I
think
summed
it
up
rather
passionately.
You
wouldn't
think
you
could
get
passionate
about
this
subject,
but
people
have
and
think
mr.
Whiteman
summed
it
all
up.
N
You
may
well
ask,
and
I
certainly
did
as
I'm,
not
a
member
of
the
committee,
what
all
the
fuss
about
what
is
this
all
about,
and
so
I
turned
to
the
report,
the
very
useful
report
the
committee
produced
and
there
it
was
a
number
of
witnesses
to
the
committee,
including
John
Poole
injure
the
chair
of
the
UK
sa
said
that
as
president
of
RSS,
he
said,
he's
always
argued
that
fairness
demands
that
everyone
has
equal
access
to
statistics.
That
seems
reasonable
enough
in
the
report.
N
The
report
asks
the
question:
why
do
we
care
so
much
about
this?
You
may
well
ask
that
Edie
come
first
and
director-general
of
the
UK
Statistics
Authority
told
the
committee.
It's
because
at
the
heart
of
what
statistics
are
about
they're
a
public
asset,
a
public
asset,
so
they
belong
to
us
all.
They're
not
got
the
the
government's
figures,
they're
all
they're
owned
by
all
of
us,
they're
there
for
public
consumption
as
information
that
enables
the
public
to
understand
the
nature
of
the
world,
the
nature
of
policy
and
the
nature
of
decisions
that
be
made.
N
So
that's
all
reasonable
enough.
Then
we
come
to
the
attitude
of
government
and
I
think
this
is
probably
an
attitude
of
all
governments
across
the
world.
They
want
to
know
things
first
because,
as
cake
Forbes
said,
they
don't
want
to
have
a
knee-jerk
reaction
to
statistics,
and
you
can
understand
why
governments
would
say
that.
But
is
it
right
that
government
should
know
statistics
before
every
single
member
of
the
Scottish
Parliament,
given
that
they
are
public
asset,
given
that
they
tablet.
O
Assuming
in
the
quotations
that
were
hearing
so
far
from
mr.
sampston,
there
were
maybe
here
a
father
one
in
terms
of
the
evidence
from
the
chief
statistician
of
Scotland,
the
F
members
on
your
possession
choose
to
take
this
forward.
What
is
doing
is
questioning
and
I
believe
interfering
with
the
independence
of
the
chief
statistician
of
Scotland,
in
whose
judgment
we
have
trusted
to
determine
what
is
appropriate
to
share
with
ministers.
Why
do
politicians
know
better
than
chief
statistician
of
Scotland
and
will
we
hear
any
quotes
from
him
again.
I
N
N
Don't
need
the
time
back.
Thank
you
very
much
if,
if
the
cabinet
secretary
had
been
here
throughout
the
debate,
he'd
have
heard
plenty
about
the
chief
staff
decision
and
nobody
has
questioned
his
independence.
No
body
has
questioned
his
independence.
What
has
been
put
forward
is
a
perfectly
a
perfectly
reasonable
proposal
from
mr.
Whiteman,
actually
that
if
the
government
stopped
digging
in
and
that's
what's
been
happening,
that's
why
we've
got
to
this
position
the
rare
event
that
a
committee
wants
to
put
forward
a
bill
totally
on
total.
It
would
have
been
totally
unnecessary.
N
I
F
The
support
for
this
motion
for
labor
the
the
government
are
accused
of
having
an
advantage
that
allows
them
to
spill
to
be
able
to
spend
the
statistics
to
suit
their
specific
political,
not
a
tough,
and
that
that
is
one
of
the
concerns
that
a
number
of
people
have
raised
today
and
I
actually
think
that
people
will
be
a
bit
baffled
as
to
why
we
are
here,
because
it
would
have
been
best
to
try
and
resolve
this
issue.
If
at
all
possible
ministers.
F
A
white
man
hide
highlight
at
the
point
that
there
seemed
to
be
an
inconsistency
where
Mr
Mcoy.
In
the
one
time
we
seen
that
he
had
no
influence
over
the
chief
statistician
and
then
was
able
to
come
back
and
see,
but
he
was
prepared
some
canny
proposal
forward
that
the
chief
statistician
would
agree
to
and
I
think
both
the
minister
and
the
finance
secretary
have
tried
to
muddy
the
waters
about
today
by
making
about
the
confidence
that
people
see
with
them.
F
The
chief
does
session
no
one
as
in
a
way
suggestion
that
they
have
nothing
but
confidence
in
the
chief
statistician.
What
they're
saying
is
that
statistic
of
this
testicle
information
can
be
a
made
available
to
the
government.
It
can
be
made
available
Scotland
offers.
Then
it
should
be
a
meal
made
available
to
this
legislature
and
it's
be
made
available
to
the
public.
It's
really
quite
straightforward.
F
Richard
lay
oh,
my
good
friend
is.
He
does
not
have
or
see
a
problem
with
the
government
possession,
but
as
Gordon
one
hostage
point
today
there
is
a
strength
of
a
whole
host
of
academics,
distinguished
academics,
policy,
Wong's
thankthank
distinguished
in
fact.
They
all
see
that
as
a
problem.
So
it's
like
the
government
of
doing
some
kanay
Boris
Johnson.
What
am
the
eyes
that
are
the
hands
over
the
years
unwell
until
ascend
to
the
evidence
that
has
been
clearly
presented
by
many
academics
and
many
with
expertise
in
this
field.
That
say
this
needs
to
change.
F
F
I
F
I
E
I
O
F
Think
that's
the
point
and
I
think
it
was
joint
mission
that
actually
made
that
point
that
that
you
know
any
of
the
political
parties
in
here
have
aspirations
about
being
in
government.
They
should
be
aware
that
this
would
equally
apply
to
them,
and
the
answer
to
that
is
if
this
is
the
right
thing
to
do,
then
regardlessly
the
political
colour
in
the
government.
We
should
do
what's
right,
which
you
don't
reduce
fairness
and
to
the
system.
I
P
You
very
much
deputy
presiding
officer
can
I.
Firstly,
add
my
thanks
to
those
members
of
the
committee
who
have
sorry
to
to
the
Clarkes
for
their
always
diligent
efforts
and
from
the
onset
of
our
inquiry
into
economic
data
and
through
the
committee's
consideration
of
the
pre-release
access
their
input,
nor
advice
and
that
of
spice
has
been
immensely
valuable.
Our
convener
Gordon
Lyndhurst
has
provided
a
comprehensive
account
of
the
committee's
work.
P
So
far
in
this
area,
we've
looked
in
significant
detail
at
the
whole
range
of
economic
figures
produced
in
Scotland,
and
the
question
of
pre-release
access
has
been
a
common
thread
across
this
work.
The
committee
decided
to
take
a
further
look
into
this
particular
issue
to
highlight
what
is
to
most
of
us
an
example
of
a
clear
UNAM
anomaly.
Today
we're
reporting
back
to
the
chamber
with
some
sensible
proposals
for
change,
because
the
questions
at
the
heart
of
today's
debate
is
one
of
fairness
and
good
practice
in
his
introduction
to
the
2010
review
on
pre-release
access.
P
The
chair
of
the
UK
Statistics
Authority
commented
that
the
quality
of
access
is
a
central
principle
of
good
statistical
practice
and
in
Italian,
when
economics
often
caused
significant
political
ripples.
The
issue
of
fairness
arises
to
in
several
cases.
Pre-Release
access
provides
what
is
obviously
an
advantage
to
ministers,
allowing
them
to
formulate
responses
well
in
advance
of
release
and,
of
course,
where
matters
under
discussion
can
be
controversial.
That
advantage
also
acts
as
a
disadvantage
to
others.
Some
have
suggested
that
ministers
are
in
a
unique
position
where
they
are
expected
to
give
informed
consent
comment
quickly.
P
What
that
amounts
to
in
practice
is
saying
that
ministers,
and
possibly
in
some
limited
circumstances
to
24-hour
news
media
will
be
inconvenienced
by
reducing
the
scope
of
pre-release
access.
I
would
have
more
sympathy
with
this
position
if
considerations
were
equally
applied
to
others,
but
giving
evidence
in
support
of
a
no
change
position.
Keith
Brown
commented
the
pre-release
access
ensures
that
when
ministers
are
called
upon
to
respond
quickly
to
stats
at
the
time
of
publication,
they
can
do
so
in
an
informed
way.
P
I
see,
however,
that
concern
does
not
extend
to
other
parties
that
are
involved
and
I.
Don't
just
read
opposition
parties
in
this
Parliament
with
a
whole
range
of
organisations
beyond
this
chamber
that
can
be
very
much
affected
by
these
releases.
I
went
at
this
stage.
They
too
are
often
called
on
to
comment
at
short
notice.
It
also
chimes
as
a
as
a
peculiar
argument
that
Minister.
P
P
C
P
Talking
about
economic
day,
but
I
will
come
back
to
that
at
that
point.
Dean
Lockhart
also
spoke
at
some
length
about
these
comparisons,
and
I
will
not
reopen
his
argument
safe
to
say
that
it's
got
at
that
point.
Dean
Lockhart
also
spoke
at
some
length
about
these
comparisons,
and
I
will
not
reopen
his
arguments
safe
to
say
that
the
Scottish
government
appears
to
find
it
itself
in
an
anomalous
position
length
about
the
bill
proposal
document
that
the
committee
has
published,
as
I
said
previously.
P
How
we
take
those
principles
of
fairness
and
good
practice
forward
will
be
a
matter
ultimately
for
Parliament.
He
spoke
about
the
merits
of
the
proposal,
the
option
of
a
faced
approach
and
an
independent
review
of
the
impact
of
the
removed
law.
Pre-Release
access,
the
bill
proposal
excelsis,
it
suggested
a
fault
position,
but
it
is
one
that
can
be
adaptable
to
exceptional
circumstances.
This
is
not
a
proposal
visiting
ill-considered
that
discard
disregards
caution.
P
This
is
an
important
event
to
talk
about
this
debate
today.
This
is
an
important
event
that
covers
a
crucial
aspect
of
the
economic
landscape
in
Scotland.
That's
on
their
blog
today
and
I
would
certainly
agree
with
them
and
I
think
that
has
been
highlighted
by
the
fact
that,
since
this
debate
started,
the
government
front
bench
has
been
beefed
up
by
an
additional
Minister
and
the
cabinet
secretary
himself,
albeit
slightly
late
presiding
officer.
Graham
Simpson
touched
an
equate
from
Ed
home
force
and
the
Director
General
of
the
UK
statistics
Authority.
P
He
observed
that
statistics
are
a
public
asset.
The
public
and
civil,
a
civic
society
has
as
much
of
a
right
to
see
and
comment
on
the
fruits
of
the
public
sectors
work
as
a
government
minister.
This
gets
to
the
heart
of
the
issue
and
why
the
committee
has
taken
it
forward
and
I
hope
the
government
will
support
it
today.
Thank.
I
D
Look
at
the
data
inquiry
followed
an
inquiry,
a
six-month
enquiry
into
scholars
economy
that
found
that
the
SNP
had
failed
to
meet
all
seven
of
your
own
economic
targets.
This
is
an
important
part
of
that
analysis.
The
block
from
the
Fraser
Vandor
today
described
this
as
an
important
event.
Do
not
recognize
the
valuable
contribution
from
stakeholders
like
the
Fraser
founder
who
do
recognize.
The
importance
of
this
issue.
Debate.
C
Will
not
improve
GDP
one
iota,
the
very
staff
that
we
happen
to
be
discussing,
but
the
second
reason
why
I
regret
this
debate
is
because
Derek
Mackay
actually
offered
a
compromise
option,
which
has
been
evidently
rejected
so
for
those
who
are
asking
and
for
the
government
to
shift
and
asking
for
it
for
small
changes
to
be
made,
those
changes
were
offered.
A
compromise
approach
was
provided,
but
that
was
rejected.
C
No
members
have
made
much
of
the
Office
of
National
Statistics,
leading
by
example
in
the
committee's
position
seems
to
be
heavily
influenced
by
evidence
heard
during
the
course
of
their
inquiry
that
the
ons
and
Bank
of
England
have
ended
pyaari
to
their
statistics.
Now
that
ignores,
of
course,
the
fact
that
PRA
is
still
granted
first
statistics
produced
by
other
UK
government
departments
and
since
the
awareness
ended
pyaari
to
their
stats.
A
year
ago,
on
the
1st
of
july
2017,
only
the
Bank
of
England
has
follow
suit.
C
J
Than
two
things,
first,
the
Minister
compares
the
Scottish
government
to
fight
your
whole
departments.
Is
that
actually
sincerely
her
view
that
Scottish
government,
as
equivalent
to
Whitehall
departments
and
also
she
talked
a
lot
about
the
independence
of
the
chief
statistician
in
her
in
the
Cabinet
Secretary,
the
kind
of
sitting?
Next
her,
he
told
us
in
May
29,
the
PA
raised
a
matter
of
the
chief
decision
and
the
independence
of
his
role
is
crucial.
He
then
goes
on
to
say,
I
informed
the
responsible
statisticians.
J
C
Understand
the
position
where
the
committee
members
are
asking
us
to
do
something
and
at
the
same
time
saying
that
we
can't,
because
we
talked
about
the
Independence
of
the
chief
statistician
and
in
terms
of
likening
to
Whitehall
Department.
Of
course,
I
would
not
like
in
us
to
Whitehall
Department.
However,
I
take
issue
with
the
argument.
That's
been
made
that
the
Scottish
government
are
the
only
ones
that
allow
pyaari,
which
is
clearly
not
the
case
because
of
what
I
said
the
white
hold
to
partners,
and
there
is
a
big
distinction
between
arm's
length.
C
Statistical
agencies
such
as
the
ons
and
statisticians
working
within
government
and
the
evidence
of
policy
and
practice
that
has
been
presented
to
the
committee
is
based
on
the
views
of
individuals
working
out
with
government.
Now
pre-release
access
is
a
long-standing
practice
in
Scotland
and
it's
only
a
small
part
of
maintaining
trust
in
our
official
statistics,
something
that,
incidentally,
we
have
a
strong
reputation
for
the
arrangements
for
PRA
economic
statistics
in
Scotland
have
been
in
place
for
many
years,
including
under
labor
and
PRA
was
called
a
common
practice
before
the
2008
order
was
introduced.
C
We
strongly
support
the
existing
PRA
framework,
which
strengthens
and
empower
statisticians
to
act
in
a
professional
manner,
and
there
has
been
no
material
change
that
would
warrant
a
change
in
practice.
Now
this
to
be
has
come
about
because
the
the
committee
has
refused
to
acknowledge
and
honor
the
statistical
arrangements
that
the
Scottish
government
adheres
to,
whereby
Ministers
accept
the
professional
advice
about
statistical
matters
from
Scotland's
chief
statistician,
and
this
ball
bill
proposal
disregards
the
established
practice
that
successfully
operates
in
Scotland
now
and
presenting
officer.
C
B
C
Ministers
of
opinion
that
I've
just
identified
official
statistics
are
crucially
important
and
their
importance
is
maintained
by
the
work
of
statisticians
to
realize
the
value
that
is
inherent
in
the
vast
amount
of
data
that
the
government
holds
and
then
makes
publicly
available,
and
data
is
a
public
asset
and
the
public
have
access
to
that
data.
We
want
to
make
that
publicly
available
in
an
ethical
and
transparent
way
and
I've
enjoyed
the
exchange
of
views.
A
in
this
debate
this
afternoon
and
look
forward
to
the
closing
remarks.
Thank.
I
Q
Firstly,
I'd
like
to
thank,
of
course,
the
Clarkes
on
space
for
their
Kane's
assistance
in
providing
some
useful
and
important
background
on
this
topic.
As
a
new
member
of
the
committee,
I
wasn't
part
of
the
build-up
to
this
exciting
debate,
but
I've
had
a
look
over
the
issues
that
have
arisen
since
the
committee
published
its
report.
How
to
make
data
count
in
February
of
last
year.
Clearly.
F
Q
Are
definite
ease
of
opinion
as
well
held
today,
which
makes
the
debate
wee
bit
unusual
committee
bills
usually
emerged
from
a
united
front
and
there
have
only
been
seven
such
bills
to
date
as
I
understand
it
covering
regulatory
matters
or
establishing
Commissioner
post,
and
things
like
that.
But
this
one
is
quite
different.
Q
So
I
would
like
to
commend
members
on
both
sides
of
the
debate
for
their
thoughtful
and
at
times
or
robust
contributions,
the
heart
of,
of
course,
they
didn't
officer
as
whether
the
government
should
continue
to
be
afforded
pre-release
access
or
PRA
to
certain
statistical
information.
The
committee's
view
and
proposals
by
majority
are
set
out
in
its
report
on
June
the
6th,
and
they
are
that
pre-release
access
to
statistics
should
be
removed
entirely
for
Scottish
GDP
and
retail
sales
figures
followed
by
a
review
of
the
impact
of
this
and
the
reduction
from
five
days
to
one.
Q
For
those
statistics
will
there's
currently
a
five
DPR
arrangement
in
please.
The
justification
for
this
are
all
statistics
are
in
fact
public
assets,
and
that
was
said
many
times
during
the
debate
today
by
members.
This
should
be
equally
available
to
all
not
made
available
to
some
nor
others,
potentially
given
first-mover.
It
was
described
advantage
to
those
who
get
them
early
and
ultimately
risking
public
skepticism
about
the
credibility
of
the
statistics
themselves.
Q
Indeed,
his
view
of
this,
which
was
stated
in
the
one
of
the
committee
reports
in
the
member
2017,
is
that
there
are
more
important
issues.
Xscape
such
as
data
handling
and
security,
and
establishing
a
culture
of
Independence
for
has
function
yeah.
These
issues
remain
and
the
evidence
of
these
concerns
have
been
helped.
Today.
Q
Now,
during
the
debate
design
officer,
a
number
of
members
made
some
really
important
contributions
and
I
would
like
to
just
give
a
little
flavor
of
one
or
two
of
the
cultural
contributions
that
were
made,
our
convener
Gordon
lund,
toast,
of
course,
open
debate
was
a
fairly
comprehensive
summary
of
how
we
got
to
where
we
are.
He
regretted
it
was
a
repeat
debate
in
a
sense,
but
it
was
still
important
to
engage.
Q
The
testicle
integrity
was
crucial,
but
he
also
outlined
the
pros
and
cons
of
the
debate
that
wasn't
in
front
of
us
and,
of
course
outlined
as
many
of
the
members,
but
what
the
options
were
that
were
presented
by
the
committee
he
described
Scotland
as
under
normally
as
other
members
did
during
debate,
but
compromise
that
arrived,
perhaps
a
little
late,
I
think,
as
the
convener
had
said,
there's
an
external
view
of
prev
should
go.
Many
bodies
support
an
end
to
it
and
abolition
costs.
Nothing
I
think
that
was
one
of
his
final
remarks.
Q
Q
I
would
say
about
more
pressing
economic
matters
that
should
perhaps
face
the
economy
committee
and
members
of
the
Parliament
that
the
cabinet
secretary
offered
a
compromise
solution
to
us
that
PRI
is
the
norm
is
retained
by
other
UK
Department,
so
she
made
clear
and
her
opening
remarks
and
tender
and
her
summing
up
the
critical
Independence
of
the
chief
statistician
with
end
with
their
proposal
that
was
coming
from
the
committee
and
that
view
wasn't
shared
entirely
by
all
the
members,
but
was
by
by
some.
There
is
no
higher
rate
of
access
for
ministers.
Q
She
said
ministers
are
expected
to
respond
immediately.
Parliament
needs
to
focus
its
energies
on
more
pressing
economic
matters.
A
colleague
didn't
Lockhart
started
off,
telling
us
really
about
foi
ashes
and
the
whole
culture
of
secrecy,
secrecy
that
he
felt
was
prevalent
and
some
government
circles
PRA
was
contrary
to
the
principles
of
equal
access
for
all.
It's
a
public
asset
and
that's
the
nature
of
some
of
these
statistics,
and
we
should
be
Andy.
Whiteman
gave
an
absolute
passionate,
passionate
case
to
end
party,
a
PRA.
He
regretted
having
the
debate
which
started
in
2008.
Q
We
had
issues
a
bit.
Please
Elise
in
the
quality
of
access
were
raised
by
then
successive
administrations
passed
the
BOK.
He
said,
and
it's
about
what
the
law
should
say
and
whether
the
chief
statistician
is
effectively
independent
of
government
or
not.
My
colleague,
Gordon
McDonald
gave
a
powerful
defense,
I
would
say
of
PRA.
It
was
not
convinced
that
the
bill
was
necessary,
presiding
officer,
it
referred
to
the
committee's
actual
proposals
and
that
the
Bank
of
England,
which
came
up
several
times
during
the
debate,
still
had
access
to
PRA,
which
was
renewed
every
year.
Q
He
told
the
Cabinet
Office
may
have
rejected
ending
PRA,
and
that
is
important
for
good
government
and
none
of
the
thought
to
UK
departments
supported
ending
PRA,
and
there
was
no
legislation
on
it.
Since
2008,
we
can
see
Poseidon
also
how
the
ebb
and
flow
of
the
debate
has
taken
place.
Jackie
Baillie
spoke
with
her
usual
passion
about
the
debate,
saying
that
last
committee
bill
was
in
2003
some
16
years
ago
and
less
ability
that
the
committees
have
in
the
Scottish
Parliament
actually
gives
the
Parliament
more
teeth.
Q
That
whale
almost
immediately
regretted
joining
the
committee,
since
this
was
his
first
contribution
as
a
committee
member
to
speak
in
this
debate
to
spoke
about
the
importance
of
pra
and
allowing
the
government
ministers
to
do.
He
can
said
that
was
their
job
in
representing
their
the
posts
and
portfolios
that
they
have
to
do
presiding
officer,
I.
Q
Think
I'm
running
out
a
little
time
here
as
I
watch
the
clock,
but
I
think
would
like
to
finish
by
thanking
the
members
and
apologize
to
those
who
I
couldn't
recall
and
just
my
my
notes
to
speak
just
now,
but
to
highlight
the
issue
and
for
that
tenacity.
In
pursuing
this,
since
the
report
was
issued
last
year,
statistics
which
offer
economic
data
do
matter
to
us
a
great
deal,
and
you
could
tell
that
today
and
it's
clear
that
all
members
are
keen
that
these
are
hands
who
handled
sensitively
fairly
and
properly
anumana.
Q
That
allows
both
the
government
to
do
its
job
but
which
does
not
disadvantage
others.
We
were
entitled
to
question
the
government
and
hold
it
to
account
from
what
I
think
I
heard
from
the
government
as
they
would
be
content
to
operate
as
a
24
hour.
Maximum
applied
to
all
statistics
which
to
me
doesn't
seem
too
far
from
the
committee's
possession
set
out
engine.
Q
Of
course,
there
are
some
people
who,
if
you
see
that
this
type
of
debate
as
all
pointlessly
anyway
the
notion
of
replacing
a
clash
of
ideas
and
vision,
but
the
form
of
a
policy
calculus
was
always
jubie's
and
anyone
still
hankering
for
it
should
admit
that
the
numbers
up
a
statistician
or
even
a
politician
can
I
have
his
head
in
an
oven
and
his
feet
and
ice
so
that
he
can
see
that
an
average.
He
feels
pain.
So
will
her
presiding
officer,
I,
hope,
I've.
Q
A
Thank
you
very
much,
mr.
coffee.
That
concludes
our
debate
this
afternoon
and
we're
going
to
turn
straight
to
decision
time.
There's
only
one
question
today.
The
question
is
that
motion
one
eight,
seven,
two:
seven
in
the
name
of
God
and
Lyndhurst
on
a
bill
proposal
on
pre-release
access
to
statistics
we
agreed
or
L
agreed
we're,
not
agreed,
we'll
move
to
a
vote
and
members
be
cast
their
votes.
No.