The Telegraph can reveal that after the Office for National Statistics (ONS)’s census methodology was questioned, it was suggested that employees might not feel “safe.”
After learning that the population may have overestimated the number of trans people due to a poorly phrased question, top leaders on the LGBTQ+ staff network of the statistics body expressed concern about the “impact” on trans employees.
Academics questioned the ONS’s findings next year, which indicated that there were 262,000 trans people in England in the 2021 census – 0.5% of people over the age of 16. For those who did not speak English as their primary language, the number was 2.2%, which made scientists believe that the question — which was being used for the first time — might have been confusing.
The question was, “Is the gender you identify with the same as the sex you were born with?”
Uncertain information
The Office for Statistics Regulation reviewed the situation and concluded that the ONS may have communicated “the natural uncertainties” relating to the information more effectively in October.
The ONS continued to have “confidence in our gender identification estimates at a national level,” according to Jen Woolford, director of community data, on November 8.
She acknowledged that there were “some patterns in the data that are consistent with — but do not clearly demonstrate — that some respondents might not have understood the question as intended, for instance, those with limited English language proficiency in some areas.”
Although the patterns were “unexpected,” she clarified that this does not imply that they are incorrect and that it was “impossible to calculate any potential under or overestimate.”
As a “sponsor” of the organization’s “LGBTQ+ and Allies Network,” Ms. Woolford wrote to ONS staff on November 22 about the controversy surrounding the data, according to The Telegraph.
Emma Rourke, the ONS’s deputy national statistician for health, people, and methods, as well as Darren Morgan, its director of economic statistics creation and analysis, who are network sponsors, co-wrote the message.
‘Impacted’
The statement, which was titled “a message of support for colleagues in the LGBTQ+ community,” mentioned the “recent media coverage of our statistics about sexual orientation and gender identity,” as well as a separate investigation mandated by Science Secretary Michelle Donelan to look into whether public organizations are collecting information on self-identified gender rather than biological sex.
The statement continued, “We have been speaking with transgender colleagues and members of the wider LGBTQ+ community about the impact this has had on their wellbeing over the past few months.
In light of this, we want to reiterate our commitment to ensuring that everyone in ONS has a safe, inclusive work environment where they can thrive.”
The statement stated that the LGBTQ+ & Allies Network had been “invited to speak with senior leaders” with the intention of sharing knowledge about the experiences of our trans colleagues, and signposting people to resources if they had been “impacted” by the situation; On the Day of Remembrance.
It continued, “Please support colleagues during this time and understand that we are all affected by this situation in different ways.”
The Telegraph was informed that the statement was misguided by an ONS staff member who requested anonymity. The staff member said the statement “seems to redefine it as an attack on the wellbeing of trans people within the ONS,” rather than accepting the validity of the assessment, or even the right of scientists to talk about biological sex.
“It’s like pretending that someone is attacking religious people by questioning the accuracy of our church data.”
Conflict of interests
Maya Forstater, executive director of Sex Matters, argued that Ms. Woolford was in a conflict of interest because “the same person responsible for defending the unsatisfactory survey data on trans identification to the public and regulator also leads the ONS’s internal trans activist lobby group.”
The ONS and its senior leadership are allowing emotional blackmail, forced speech, and ideological beliefs to corrupt the work of crucial importance to the UK, she continued, “rather than upholding the principle of people who develop national statistics being accurate, objective and independent.”
It is troubling that the ONS has treated investigation of its data as a threat to its employees, according to Michael Biggs, an Oxford University sociology professor who was one of the first to query it.
A crucial question, he continued, is whether the ONS has been giving its “LGBTQ+ and Allies Network” undue influence over the gathering of sex and gender data.
In response, a spokesperson for the ONS stated that the organization had “always welcomed” the investigation mandated by Ms. Donelan and would cooperate fully once the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology announced it.
“We will continue to support our colleagues who are delivering ONS statistics with the utmost professionalism and objectivity in the meantime.”
