Skip to main content

Disabled: Greater London

Volume 490: debated on Monday 23 March 2009

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many people identifying themselves as disabled have been employed in (a) the London Borough of Bexley and (b) Greater London in each of the last 10 years. (264973)

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.

Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated March 2009:

As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking how many people identifying themselves as disabled have been employed in (a) the London Borough of Bexley and (b) Greater London in each of the last 10 years. (264973)

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) compiles estimates of the number of persons resident in the geographical areas specified, who identified themselves as having a limiting health problem lasting more than 12 months, and were employed.

These estimates in Table 1 are from the Annual Population Survey (APS) and its predecessor the annual Labour Force Survey (LFS) and follow the International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition of employment. Figures have been provided for periods up to June 2008 which is the latest period for which figures are available.

As these estimates are for a subset of the population in small geographical areas, they are based on small sample sizes, and are therefore subject to large margins of uncertainty. A guide to the quality of the estimates is given in Table 1.

Table 1. Number of disabled1 persons in employment resident in Bexley and London

Thousand

12 months ending

Bexley

London

February 1999

12

301

February 2000

10

340

February 2001

11

345

February 2002

13

363

February 2003

15

386

February 2004

12

354

March 2005

13

355

March 2006

12

371

March 2007

14

384

March 2008

14

354

June 2008

***15

*375

1 Persons age 16+ who had a limiting health problem lasting more than 12 months.

Note:

Coefficients of Variation have been calculated for the latest period as an indication of the quality of the estimates. See Guide to Quality below.

Guide to Quality:

The Coefficient of Variation (CV) indicates the quality of an estimate, the smaller the CV value the higher the quality. The true value is likely to lie within +/- twice the CV—for example, for an estimate of 200 with a CV of 5 per cent. we would expect the population total to be within the range 180-220

Key CoefficientStatistical Robustness

* 0 [le] CV<5 Estimates are considered precise

** 5 [le] CV <10 Estimates are considered reasonably precise

*** 10 [le] CV <20 Estimates are considered acceptable

**** CV ≥ 20 Estimates are considered too unreliable for practical purposes

Source:

Annual Population Survey/Annual Labour Force Survey