Seen elsewhere
Twitter
Support

 

Buy

Click images for more details

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Great blogging career moves | Main | Civil Serf is down »
Sunday
Mar092008

More statistical analysis of MPs' expenses

Following my recent post on the lack of correlation between MPs' staff costs and the amount they spent on office costs, I thought of another interesting test I could do.

TheyWorkForYou publishes figures detailing what proportion of letters sent via their website are actually responded to within a reasonable time. We would expect that MPs with large staff costs should be able to get prompt replies more often than their understaffed colleagues, wouldn't we? (Actually, given we think they're paying their wives and families to do nothing, we wouldn't expect this at all, but let's play along with the hypothesis, shall we?)

Here's the graph:

MP-expenses-v-output.gifAgain, I've plotted a best fit line so we can understand what's going on a little better.

This time, there is a microscopic correlation, but even so, it's still not good news for our friends in Westminster. The slight downslope to the graph actually seems to show that an MP with low staff costs is more likely to answer his correspondence on time than his high claiming counterpart.

What possible explanation can there be for this anomoly?

I just can't imagine.... 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (2)

If you removed the outlier (£0 staff cost?!?), the R2 would be pretty close to 0.
Mar 14, 2008 at 10:16 AM | Unregistered CommenterIan
The outlier is correct, apparently. Philip Hollobone does all his own typing.
Mar 14, 2008 at 1:46 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>