-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 11:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: More Misleading ONS Figures


     MORE MISLEADING ONS FIGURES; THREAT TO HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY 
     PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY UNEMPLOYMENT RATES
     
     British official unemployment statistics continue to go from bad to 
     worse.  ONS has now started to publish, in Labour Market Trends and I 
     assume in NOMIS, what it untruthfully calls claimant unemployment 
     "rates" for parliamentary constituencies and for NUTS3 areas.  These 
     are compiled on the "workforce" basis already used for TTWAs and local 
     authorities, which grossly misrepresent unemployment in many areas.  A 
     "workforce" unemployment "rate" is the claimant unemployed resident in 
     the area divided by the sum of the number of people with a workplace 
     in the area plus the resident unemployed.  Areas with net incommuting 
     have their rate underestimated (denominator too big) while those with 
     net outcommuting have their rate overestimated (denominator too 
     small).  The figure is not a "rate" because many, and frequently most, 
     individuals appearing in the denominator are not at risk of appearing 
     in the numerator.  It is NOT the rate of unemployment among residents 
     of the area;  it is also NOT the rate of unemployment of those who 
     work in the area since if they become unemployed they will be ascribed 
     to their area of residence.  It is NOT the rate of unemployment for 
     any meaningful aggregate and to express unemployment as a percentage, 
     say, of the number of starlings nesting in the area would be just as 
     useful, and statistically valid.
     
     As explained below, this action by ONS has created a threat to the 
     survival of the truthful and very valuable parliamentary constituency 
     estimated unemployment rates (which really are rates) published by the 
     House of Commons Library.  I hope members of this list will take such 
     action as is open to them to help ensure the continuation of this 
     important House of Commons work.
     
 
The opportunity to take such action has been afforded by the setting up of a
Parliamentary Sub-Committee whose agenda includes 'Is there a Jobs Gap?' and
the extent to which this job gap is properly measured by the official
statistics.   I have put in evidence to the Committee that includes the
recommendation that 1) the ONS should provide annual estimates of
economically active population for local areas that would support the
production of claimant unemployment rates for local areas, and 2)the
publication by the ONS of misleading 'workforce' unemployment rates for
local areas should be ended.

A copy of the text of the evidence, and a table listing 24 parliamentary
constituencies where the so-called 'workforce unemployment rates' produced
by the ONS differs by more than SIX PERCENT from the true residence-based
unemployment rate estimates produced by the House of Commons, has been
posted as a file on the homepage of this list at
<http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/radstats>.  

The evidence is supported by a chart showing the want-to-work unemployment
rate over 1984 to 1998, a table listing the 79 consitituencies with the
largest number of claimants, and a chart showing the concentration of
unemployment in inner London.   I haven't posted these charts or the other
table as files on the homepage of the list.  But if anyone wants copies I
would be pleased to email or fax them.

Ray Thomas, Social Sciences, Open University
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: 01908-679081   Fax: 01908-550401
Post: 35 Passmore, Milton Keynes MK6 3DY 
 


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%