THERE IS a famous statement that I always keep in mind when I’m reading research or listening to politicians quoting facts and figures.

“There are lies, damned lies and statistics”. The statement itself is problematic as its origin is uncertain. It’s often attributed to Mark Twain, but he credited it to Benjamin Disraeli and it almost certainly didn’t originate with him. But the sentiment and message remain true.

Statistics are often used to cover up, deceive and lie even though its purpose is to show fair comparisons. Take for example the statistics on unemployment and how the new Universal Credit system will enable people to benefit from work.

It sounded like a simple, common sense idea. Why have different benefit systems using different tests to help those who were unemployed or who needed assistance due to disability?

Surely replacing old outdated systems with one easy to manage benefit – Universal Credit - must be the way to go? Superficially it’s difficult to argue against this, but the reality is very different.

After weeks of arguments, claims and counter-claims the Minister in Charge, Esther McVey, is admitting that some people will be worse off, by anything up to £200 per month. The news was a blow to Downing Street who countered with the announcement that an extra £3.1 billion was being put into the system.

Even McVey was at pains to throw an impressive statistic at us when questioned about the cuts: “1,000 people a day since 2010 have been going into work”. Let’s think about that. 365 days per year, over eight years equals 2,920 days. Is McVey really claiming that 2,920,000 more people are now in work than there were in 2010? It seems she is.

If we look at the unemployment figures from the official National Office for Statistics, we find that there were 2,488,000 people unemployed in May 2010. That figure has dropped to 1,360,000 in May 2018. This means the official figure is 1,128,000 more people in work. Her claim does not seem to stack up.

Admittedly we must also account for things such as a rise in the population of work age adults, more jobs, that the figures are averages and not absolutes, but I cannot see how we get even close to the figure McVey was suggesting. Perhaps she was talking about ‘working days’? That would be 260 working days per year for a five-day working week. This still makes 2.6 million people and that’s still nearly 1.5 million more than the official figures suggest.

We should also ask what “in work” means. Does it mean well paid full-time jobs? No. It could include anyone on a zero hours contract or working just a couple of hours per week, sporadically. It means people may still be in work and on Universal Credit.

The problem is, when a politician makes a statement live on TV it’s very difficult to challenge this unless you know, in advance, what they may say and have your own facts and figures to hand.

In another field, education, the DfE and Education Secretary Damian Hinds have been telling people for a very long time that “more money than ever before is being spent on education”. We know that headteachers in schools have been campaigning hard for more funding and have presented figures that show real-term funding in schools has been cut by up to eight per cent. The DfE, Ministers and Conservative politicians consistently produced the ‘more money than ever’ statement to try and stem any criticism. Except this statement is misleading. The National Office for Statistics gave the DfE and Hinds a metaphorical slap on the wrist as the statement included the fees paid by students to universities and private school fees paid by parents. The question was about funding for schools – state schools. Funding has decreased. Schools are facing big cuts.

The problem is how statistics are used and abused, not just by politicians, but across many different walks of life. Politicians and PR companies trade on what I call the “truth versus accuracy” game. In one sense it is “true” that more money than ever is being spent on education – we have more children in schools (this attracts more funding) and more students going to university paying more fees than ever. Overall, the education budget seen as “anything spent on education” can truthfully be said to be “bigger than ever”, but it is not an ‘accurate’ response to the question “are schools being underfunded”?

The problem with statistics is endemic. Few have the training to easily separate the “truth” from the spurious accuracy of their pronouncements.