The Future of Local Government Statistics

Abstract

THE main use to which local government statistics are put is to assist central government departments to supervise local authorities' provision of services. The statistics are also used by local authorities themselves to compare their provision with that of other authorities and for other internal management purposes, but what is collected (and how this is processed) very much reflects its principal function. Since the central government departments, the authorities themselves, and non-official workers use the data to cast light on similar issues, the strengths and weaknesses of the collection and its use can reasonably be judged by its pertinence to the supervision of authorities by the central government. It follows from this that the nature of local government statistics reflects the way in which the individual central departments supervise authorities' activities. The attitude of the Department of Education and Science to local authorities is described by the standard work on central-local relations as positive and promotional (Griffith, 1966). Its wide range of statistics is just one manifestation of this attitude which is part of the department's tradition. Again, the Ministry of Housing, whose attitude to several aspects of central-local relations Professor Griffith described as laissez-faire, collected a range of statistics that was until recently far less adequate, although one would imagine that the need for quantitative indicators of local performance would be greater when there is a very large number of authorities, some of whom are very small, and when there is nothing corresponding to the regional inspectorate found in other ministries. But, on the whole, the range and quality of the statistics available are and have been good-much better than for most other sectors of the economy. This must be borne in mind if we are to keep any implied criticisms in perspective. I shall therefore confine my remarks to points about (a) the range of aspects of standards covered; (b) the degree of detail and standardization of definitions of financial data; (c) the allocation of services between recipients; (d) the co-ordination of substitute services; (e) the basis for allocating resources between areas; and some of the implications of these for planning the collection of data in a reconstructed system of local government. 1. THE RANGE OF STANDARDS OF PROVISION OF SERVICES COVERED Departments need data on variation in standards of provision of services. It is important to have an adequate coverage of the most important aspects of standards. Indices of area variation in different dimensions of standards are usually not highly correlated with one another, even when services are relatively simple. An example is the range of services for old people. The number of residents in old people's homes is uncorrelated with expenditure per resident, for example. Similarly, there is little correlation between the number of persons receiving domestic help and indices of the amounts each recipient gets. The data collected by the central government departments, and the form in which these data are published, determine the indices