ONS in favour

Dear .................MP

I have long been concerned about honesty and exaggeration in Government
and wonder if MPs or the public are seriously misled in order to put
policies through.

I was amazed when my attention was drawn to one of latest Office of
National Statistics reports and realised that the Government had claimed
popular support for a total smoking ban by stating 71% of the population
favoured it but the actual figure is less than half of that at 33%.
Surely this is reprehensible.

I am not one of your constituents so cannot ask that you act on my
behalf on this revelation but hope this may be of help when asked to
support Government on other contentious matters.

Yours Faithfully,

Replies- more below but this was from John Healey at the Treasury and is so similar to the earlier Hewitt one under it

HM Treasury, I Horse Guards Road, London, SWIA 2HQ

I refer to your letter of 31 July that I include below with my comments in bold.

I certainly found lots of it interesting especially after reading the recent ASH article in the Guardian and fail to understand how Government can stand by the statements you made.

----------------------------------

Thank you for your e mail of 8 July about figures in the Office of National Statistics (ONS) report "Smoking related behaviour and attitudes, 2005 " published on 6 July, which show that 33 per cent of the population favour a total smoking ban.

I should point out that the ONS survey does not actually ask, "Do you support/oppose a ban on smoking in all public places?" However, this question has been answered by other surveys. For example, in their report published on 15 December 2005, the Health Select Committee observed that:
A poll conducted for ASH by BMRB (the British Market Research Bureau) in July 2005 asked: "The Government has announced plans to make most enclosed public places smokefree from 2008. Would you support a proposal to make ALL enclosed 'workplaces, including pubs and restaurants, smokefree?" It found that 73 per cent of respondents agreed with the proposition.
These results which show the majority of the public who favour smoke-free legislation, is also mirrored in a number of published independent opinion surveys and in the responses to the wide public consultation which the Department of Health carried out in 2005. Over 49,000 of the 57,000 responses favoured comprehensive smoke-free legislation.
Far from ignoring public opinion, we have listened to views inside and outside Parliament on restricting smoking in public places, particularly in relation to pubs and membership clubs. Throughout this process, there has been the most extensive private, public and political debate and consultation on the most appropriate policy response.
As a result of taking account of people's views, we put forward proposals to a free vote in the House of Commons on 14 February. The Commons voted by a very large majority across parties to end smoking in virtually all enclosed public places and workplaces.

This decision on the principle of smoke-free pubs and restaurants has since been endorsed by a similarly large majority, after extensive debate at the various stages of scrutiny in the House of Lords. In the House of Lords debates, the recent report on risk from the Economic Affairs Committee was discussed, but failed to convince the majority of Lords, who recognised that the risk to health of secondhand smoke is the driving force behind this legislation.

The smoke-free provisions in the Health Bill have been carried on free votes across parties by large majorities in both Houses of Parliament. This Parliamentary support for smoke-free legislation reflects the very widespread public support. The Bill is a huge step forward for public health and will help reduce deaths from
cancer, heart disease and other smoking related diseases.

Quote:

Dear Bilal Ghafoor
I have read your response to my email and find most of it predictable but very informative.
I have made comments in appropriate places and would appreciate your further comment.
Yours Faithfully
--------------------
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for your email of 10 July to Patricia Hewitt about smoking statistics. The large number of emails sent to Ms Hewitt means that it is not always possible for her to reply personally. Your email has been passed on to me for reply and I hope you find the following information helpful.

The report you refer to may be the Office of National Statistics (ONS) report 'Smoking related behaviour and attitudes, 2005' published on 6 July. This is the report I refer to.

The ONS survey does not actually ask "Do you support/oppose a ban on smoking in all public places?". Why is this specific question so important? The ONS must have asked many much more specific questions to be able to provide such detail as found in the 124 page report. As you know this is the government’s own independent office providing.truly independent information and ensuring qualities such as relevance, integrity, quality, accessibility and freedom from political influence.

For an answer to this question, other surveys should be considered, for example the Health Select Comittee, in their report published on 15 December 2005 observed that:

A poll conducted for ASH by BMRB (the British Market Research Bureau) in July 2005 asked: "The Government has announced plans to make most enclosed public places smokefree from 2008. Would you support a proposal to make ALL enclosed workplaces, including pubs and restaurants, smokefree?" It found that 73% of respondents agreed with the proposition.
The Health Select Committee heard of many statistics and appears to favour those provided by funded self interest groups.

The fact that a large majority of the public who favour smoke-free legislation is also shown in a number of published independent opinion surveys ………….
Are these are the independent polls you refer to:
YouGov Poll December 2005 - Cancer Research UK and Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) commissioned YouGov to poll the public on their attitudes to smoking in the workplace and other public spaces.
IFF Poll. - IFF Research were commissioned by ASH and Cancer Research UK to collect primary data on the issues surrounding smoking in enclosed work spaces to be fed into the government consultation on the Health Bill.
YouGov Poll August 2005 - ASH commissioned YouGov to poll the public on their attitudes to smoking in the workplace and other public spaces:
BMRB poll July 2005 - BMRB were commissioned by ASH to collect attitudes to smoking in workplaces and other public places
BMRB poll January 2005 - BMRB were commissioned by ASH to collect attitudes to smoking in workplaces and other public places, these are their findings from January 2005
Mori Poll 2004
These are clearly not independent. They are all commissioned by groups that receive funding direct from the DoH and have clearly stated aims of wanting smoking to be banned in public places. The truly independent ONS figures show how unreliable they are.
………………….and in the responses to the wider public consultation which the Department of Health carried out in 2005, when 49,000 of the 57,000 responses favoured comprehensive smoke-free legislation.
A simple study of these responses and the DoH mailing list shows the consultation would never provide any opinion other than this. To have received almost half of the 49,000 from a single pressure group with annual income of £400 Million and 30,000 members fails to engender faith in the consultation process or proportionate balance in the responses.
Throughout this process there has been the most extensive private, public and political debate and consultation on the most appropriate policy response.
Can the DoH really stand by a statement such as this? There is no evidence of opinion being specifically asked of or accepted from a smoker yet anti-smoking groups funded by yourselves appear to have been well prepared, used government funds to prepare research for official documents and to provide supportive poll results.

As a result of taking account of peoples views we put forward proposals to a free vote of the House of Commons on 14 February. ……….. The proposals put forward were exactly what the anti-smoking lobby wanted and I would suggest the DoH read and respond to the proud statements made by Deborah Arnott and Ian Willmore of ASH published in the Guardian on July 19th explaining how their “Campaigning of this kind is literally a confidence trick”:
The Commons voted by a very large majority across parties to end smoking in virtually all enclosed public places and workplaces.
They may have done but only as a result of massive lobbying from a powerful group funded by yourselves to the extent of at least £¾ Million in England alone over 5 years to 2003-04.

This decision on the principle of smoke-free pubs and restaurants has since been endorsed by a similarly large majority after extensive debate at the various stages of scrutiny in the House of Lords.

The smoke-free provisions in the Health Bill have been carried on free votes across parties by large majorities in both Houses of Parliament. This Parliamentary support for smoke-free legislation reflects the very widespread public support. ………
The independent ONS figures prove this statement of ‘widespread support’ to be wrong. The Bill is a huge step forward for public health and will help reduce deaths from cancer, heart disease and other smoking related diseases.
Blinkered by the sole aim of banning smoking in public places the DoH has ignored the impact of the bill on other important aspects of individual, community and social health. There was no consideration of the impact on health of isolation, exclusion and denial of individual pleasures that might result from the measures. The ban in Scotland has already adversely impacted upon the many smokers and non-smokers denied their simple pleasure through the recent closure of 5 bingo clubs.

So we know where we stand ---------- BUT none of what I wrote was disputed therefore they have not denied any accusations ----- SO;
"The DoH did not deny that the many 'Independent' polls were from anti-smoking groups dependent upon them for funding or that these were preferred to the truly independent ONS figures"
"The DoH failed to support the validity of consultation process or defend the disproportionate response."
"The DoH failed to respond top accusations of them being 'conned' by ASH"
"The DoH made no comment regarding a lack of consideration of the impact on health of isolation, exclusion and denial of individual pleasures that might result from the measures."
etc etc

"Thank you for emailing Gerry Sutcliffe MP about your concerns regarding the accuracy of Government statistics. As you correctly pointed out, Parliamentary protocol prevents Mr Sutcliffe from actively helping you with this matter. If it is any consolation, I can confirm that Mr Sutcliffe takes great care to ensure that any information released as part of his work as a Minister or as an MP is accurate to the best of his knowledge."
Thank you for bringing these to my attention."

"Many thanks for the email, the contents of whic I have noted. As you say, you should pursue this through your own MP."

"Thank you for writing to David Cameron - I am replying on his behalf.
Many thanks for taking the time to email and bring these statistics to our attention. We appreciate your feedback and have carefully noted the points that you have made."

"As you are not a constituent there is limit to the correspondence I may have with you but I should point out that David Cameron has committed our Party to true independence for the ONS"

"Thank you. There's little point in having independence and honesty in the way statistics are gathered if they are then wilfully distorted by the politicians who use them. So I agree with you. I hope on our side we behave more faithfully to the truth."

"Thanks and point noted & agree with. Most MPs are smart enough to see through a lot of this, but even so!"