New money: Behind the statistics spin

New Labour, new Britain...new money?

When is a new billion pounds of government funding not necessarily new?

No it's not the sort of riddle that Gordon Brown is expecting to read in his Christmas cracker, but a conundrum that many in the teaching world - maths teachers included - are trying to get their heads around.

At the root of it is Education Secretary David Blunkett's pledge last month of an extra billion pounds for the teaching profession.

In presentation terms it sounds fantastic. Even by today's standards a billion is no small sum and it's a nice round memorable figure to boot.

The problem came later when teachers' unions began to question whether this was really new money, or just a spot of creative accounting by the government.

The Department for Education told the School Teachers' Pay Review Body that £430m will come from the Education Standard Spending Fund.

Which left the National Union of Teachers scratching its head, wondering if that was in addition to the headline figure, or part of it.

New Labour, famous already for perfecting the art of spin and soundbites, has been accused of applying these skills to statistics. The Conservatives are outraged, saying the government is playing "fast and loose" with its figures.

Earlier this week, Agriculture Minister Nick Brown was hauled over the coals by the Commons Agriculture Committee for the way he announced an aid package for hard-pressed livestock farmers. The committee reported out of the £500m plus package, there was just one million pounds of new money.

Sleight of statistic

Headline: Straw pledges 5,000 extra police

In actual fact: This will replace those leaving the force

Headline: Milburn promises £50m to fight heart disease

In actual fact: This was part of the £21bn already pledged to the Health Service

Headline: £21bn for the Health Service

In actual fact: Spread over 3 years

If your eyes are starting to glaze over at the sight of all these mega-million figures, well, that's exactly the point.

To most of us, statistics - especially those to do with public spending plans - are a turn-off. We can just about deal with headlines like "£1bn cash injection" but after that, interest begins to wane rapidly.

The same is true for many journalists and the media has been criticised for taking government press releases on face value, rather than untangling the complicated finances to give a truer picture.

Crucially, there is no suggestion the government has been lying. Rather the accusations are that it is simply spinning the figures to best effect. But this would hardly be the first government to try spinning statistics.

There are a number of "tricks" to look out for.

Labour pledged £21bn for the Health Service

One of the favourites is the practice of re-announcing. For many the whole point of the November pre-budget statement, which didn't exist before Gordon Brown got to Number 11, is to trail policies which are guaranteed another airing in the following spring budget.

Even then the policy may not come into effect for another six or 12 months, affording press officers another bite of the publicity cherry.

Another tactic is comparing an inappropriate base, something that Home Secretary Jack Straw was widely accused of when he announced an extra 5,000 police officers at this year's Labour Party conference.

In fact what he meant, but omitted to make abundantly clear, was this figure would maintain current policing levels. The extra officers would largely make-up for those leaving the service.

Critics argue that Mr Blunkett's apparent success in reducing class sizes to 30 or under for five, six and seven year olds was not so much to do with investment as demographics. The number of children in that age bracket is going down.

Small print

And the government is never one to underestimate the power of big figures. Hence its much vaunted £40bn boost for health and education. In the small print it transpired not only was this figure spread over three years, it included increases for inflation and was on top of Tory spending limits which the chancellor had pledged to stick to for two years.

The fact that these issues are starting to be widely acknowledged means that Labour may be witnessing the end to cheap headlines. The media is on the lookout for any statistical sleight of hand, but the government is not about to help them.

Its plans for a National Statistics Service, which would put Whitehall figures in context, have been watered down. A government White Paper suggests the service will not handle figures already distributed by government departments, such as police numbers or hospital waiting lists.

It seems those who are intent on judging the government on its record rather than its publicity might need a good head for figures.

---

The E-cyclopedia can be contacted at [e-mail]