Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr Tim Holt
Sir: Diane Coyle's report ("CSO rethink on jobless count could add 100,000 to total", 25 September) is wrong in suggesting that the Central Statistical Office has decided to introduce monthly publication of unemployment estimates based on the International Labour Organisation definition used in the labour force survey (LFS). No decision has been taken.
The CSO has commissioned a task force to study the options for monthly publication, but the outcome will depend both upon the study's findings and upon subsequent consultation with data users.
In any event, the CSO will continue to publish the monthly measure of unemployment derived from the count of people claiming unemployment-related benefits.
No single measure of unemployment is ideal for all conceivable uses, and both the claimant count and the LFS measure have advantages and disadvantages.
Yours faithfully,
Tim Holt
Director, and Head of the
Government Statistical Service
Central Statistical Office
London, SW1
25 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments