Misleading Statistics and the ^29m "fine"

It's well documented that FGW^▸ were recently told to put in place a ^29m package of improvements, and the misreporting of statistics was the key breach that enabled the DaFT^» to lay the blame at FGW. A breach, incidentally, that FGW owned up to and advised DaFT as soon as they spotted it.

At the time that sounded to me like a technicality which was just what DaFT were waiting for, so that some of the "wrongs" of the franchise letting process could be put right without any mud sticking at DaFT.

Well, it gets better. Apparently, the stats that FGW misreported were worse than the actual ones. In other words they published stats which showed them in a less favourable light than if they had published the correct ones. Wish someone had asked DaFT that when the announcement was made.

Here's an extract from the most recent Transport Select Committee, where Tom Harris lets slip this fact.

Q781 Graham Stringer: That fact is that First Great Western lied, did they not? They gave false reasons for cancelling trains. Is that true?

Mr Harris: They misreported the level of cancellations.

Q782 Graham Stringer: Did they lie?

Mr Harris: I do not think so. Can I explain why I do not think they actually lied? Because my understanding is that their misreporting was the result - and I am not defending First Great Western in any way, I have no interest in defending First Great Western and I believe that criticism should be made where it is due, and it is certainly due of First Great Western, but my understanding of this particular point is that had they not misreported their cancellations the figures would have actually been better than what they reported, not worse.

Q783 Chairman: So they are incompetent crooks?

Mr Harris: That is a conclusion for the Committee to make, Chairman, not me.

Q784 Graham Stringer: So if they tell you inaccuracies but they are not to their disadvantage, they are not lying then?

Mr Harris: No. I think the word "lying" is a pejorative sense and I think -

Q785 Graham Stringer: It is pejorative. It is meant to be.

Mr Harris: Yes, of course, but I would not use it in the pejorative sense because I think what happened was they gave the Department figures which were wrong. I do not think that is necessarily lying, and they were figures which put them in an even worse light than the correct figures would have. So in that sense I do not see any logic in lying to make themselves look even worse.

It would be interesting to know how many times in the last 10 years a franchise has spotted an error in its performance stats and notified the DaFT, and on how many times the DaFT has taken action. I suspect the answer to the first question is quite a few times, and to the second, once.