Written question asked by David Laws (Liberal Democrat) on Tuesday, 22 October 2002, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Monday, 28 October 2002. It was answered by Ruth Kelly (Labour) on Monday, 28 October 2002 on behalf of the Office for National Statistics.

Treasury;Office for National Statistics

Question: To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what plans he has to hold an investigation into the erroneous figures on the value of United Kingdom pension contributions which have been published by the Office for National Statistics over the last four years; and if he will make a statement. - Text of letter from Len Cook of the Office for National Statistics.

Answer: Mr. David Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to hold an investigation into the erroneous figures on the value of United Kingdom pension contributions which have been published by the Office for National Statistics over the last four years; and if he will make a statement. [77001] Ruth Kelly: The answer requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply. Letter from Len Cook to Mr. David Laws, dated 28 October 2002: As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent question on pension contribution statistics [77001]. I commissioned a Review of ONS Pension Contribution Statistics on the 2 July of this year. The Terms of Reference of this Review were set out in a Press Notice (copy attached). The review panel included senior statisticians from ONS, Inland Revenue, Department of Work and Pensions and the Government Actuaries Department, supported by experts from the Association of British Insurers and from the University sector. The panel produced a report which I published on 10th October. (I attach a copy of the Press Notice that accompanied the publication of the review). I am currently drawing up an implementation plan, based on the review recommendations, and I expect to announce the details of that before the end of November. I will steer that programme of work drawing on the same sorts of expertise that contributed to the review.

Secondary information