One year ago today, the UK’s inaugural Statistics Assembly took place in London. The word ‘world-leading’ can be overused. But it is not out of place to describe an exercise in user engagement on an unprecedented scale.
The Assembly was an inspiring event. It had several hundred attendees, with many more online. It was a crucial step towards the UK statistical system becoming more open to its users. This spirit was exemplified by the speakers: they came from across the UK and internationally, and none of the main speakers was from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The statistics system can often be criticised for a lack of transparency in how it sets priorities. Users can sometimes feel that consultation is more about producers broadcasting what they are doing rather than listening. In this context, the openness of the Assembly felt significant, perhaps almost revolutionary.
One year on, what can we say about the way that the Assembly has influenced statistics in the UK?
In short, I am worried that there needs to be a refreshed injection of momentum into this process.
The Assembly: a step change in user engagement
The Assembly was one of the key recommendations made by the review of the Statistics Authority undertaken by Denise Lievesley in March 2024. Denise heard the concerns from users of statistics about a lack of meaningful engagement. She saw the Assembly as a mechanism for addressing this weakness.
The UK Statistics Authority (UKSA), in partnership with the Royal Statistical Society, organised the Assembly swiftly and effectively. It took place 10 months after the Lievesley review was published. It was energising, creative and open. And there was a clear follow-up: in March, the National Statistician’s Expert User Advisory Council, chaired by Professor David Hand, distilled the extensive material generated during the Assembly into a clear report setting four priorities:
- Reinvigorate sustained and effective user engagement.
- Ensure user needs for more-granular statistics are met (including small areas, urban/rural, sub-groups of society, under-represented groups and so on).
- Commit to a significant scaling up in the use of administrative data.
- Recognise the needs for UK-wide statistics and advocate for, and support, harmonised data where desirable.
So by March 2025, things looked good. The event had happened, it was a success, and a set of priorities had been identified.
A summer of change – and some progress
And then events took a different turn, with the publication of two reviews looking at long-standing ONS problems. First, in April 2025, we in the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) published a review of the ONS’s economic statistics, which highlighted deep-seated quality concerns on economic statistics. Then, in June, the Devereux review highlighted weaknesses in the ONS’s leadership, prioritisation and delivery. Since then there have been significant changes in the leadership of the ONS.
Over the last few months, under this new leadership, the ONS has been focusing on delivering an ambitious recovery plan, responding to OSR’s recommendation that it publish quarterly progress updates. It has done so with a commendable focus on openness, and with enhanced engagement with users of economic statistics.
The ONS is of course just one part of the UK statistical system, and it should not fall to the ONS alone to take forward the Assembly’s priorities. And there have been some important steps, by both the ONS and other statistics producers, to implement the Assembly’s recommendations, as set out on the UKSA website in December. Examples of progress include the publication of detailed information on the use of administrative data in the last census; the publication of a new approach to data sources; and a commitment to establish an online ‘trust centre’.
At OSR we have sought to progress the Assembly’s priorities. In particular, the new version of the Code of Practice for Statistics is more user-centric. In our day-to-day work, we challenge and support statistics producers to do better on user engagement. We have published a public involvement and engagement toolkit, which encourages producers to take a much wider lens on who they focus on when they undertake user engagement activities. Our push on intelligent transparency requires government departments to be open and proactive in making data available publicly, and our review of cross-UK comparability in June 2025 made systemic recommendations in line with the Assembly’s comparability theme.
The need to maintain momentum
There are lots of demands on the statistics system. The Assembly is just one of those, and it’s clear that all statistics producers are facing significant resource constraints.
But it’s hard to say that, one year on, the progress on the four priorities has been significant. This is recognised in the December update on the Authority website, which says that “We have not progressed development of the refreshed Authority user engagement strategy as quickly as we would have liked.”
But the Assembly’s priorities remain a powerful anchor for engagement with users of statistics, for two reasons:
Firstly, a lot of people committed time and effort to making the Assembly a success, in the expectation that it represented a substantial reset in how user engagement is thought about and delivered by UK statistics. It is important to realise the benefits of this commitment.
Secondly, there is a question of who statistics are for. In the course of 2025, there were two alternative versions of an answer to that question. The Assembly proposed the answer that statistics are for a broad, vibrant, engaged community of users. The Devereux review implied that the users who really count are the key institutions of the state drawing on economic statistics: HM Treasury, the Bank of England, the Office for Budget Responsibility – at least, for now.
Of course, both answers are correct. Statistics serve the institutions of the state and also a much broader range of users across society. An effective system holds these two sets of users in broad balance – recognising that statistics are for decision makers, but that ‘decision maker’ covers a very wide range of organisations and individuals in society.
Momentum regained?
The key point of this blog is simple. The Assembly represented a breakthrough in the way in which the statistics system opened itself up to its users. However, it should not be regarded as a one-off – but as an ongoing process, whose momentum must be maintained.
Moreover, the process for appointing a new National Statistician is underway. The new National Statistician, leading across the entire UK statistical system, can inject renewed vigour into taking forward the Assembly’s recommendations.
One year on, my view is this:
Is there a risk of a loss of momentum? Yes.
Can it be regained? Absolutely.