For the last 12months I've been doing a lot of work on healthcare statistics, and I can take the same raw data about a disease and produce two completly different headline death rates, 15% vs 35%. Both are correct, but it purely depends on how the data is 'adjusted' and presented.
Sales of the Nissan Leaf is a good example, environmental lovers are claiming the Leaf is a sales sensation with year on year growth of 100%, but actually your talking about Nissan selling 100 cars a year compared to 50 cars a year....
Therefore I take any statistics issued by the government as a rough guide, at best about any particular situation. The problem with looking at statistics is you quickly forget its people lives that make up the numbers, and I can guarrente even if two numbers look the same on a piece of paper the real life situation of those two individuals may be miles apart.
Hence people (quite rightly) become emotional when politicians come out quoting random numbers. The pediatric heart surgery review in England is a perfect example of what happens when policy makers are seen to be compelty disengaged from the human side of things. Personally I hate statistics with a passion, you need to understand the data yes, and you need data to guide policy, but when politicians who have no idea how the real world works start quoting random percentages it becomes a pointless excercise.
Clearly some people abuse the benefits system, but having traveled to just about every continent in the world, as UK citizens we should all be thankful should any of us fall ill/sick/loss work unexpectly we aren't going to end up sleeping rough, riffing through rubbish bins, or begging for healthcare.
The system does need changing, but anyone who pretends to understand the situation fully, or thinks they have a solution, is either very very intelligent or just deluded
