Vol. 320 No. 10
asked the Taoiseach if he will include in the draft census form as used in 1979, in question number 5 on marital status, a separate category for separated people to ascertain the degree of marital breakdown in this country and if his attention has been drawn to the concern of social scientists to have such information available.
5.
asked the Taoiseach in view of the lack of adequate statistics in relation to the numbers of Irish citizens affected by marital breakdown, if he proposes to include in the forthcoming census form provision for the category of separated and the retention of the marital status, other status, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 5 together.
While it is envisaged that the form of question on marital status as used in the 1979 Census of Population will be retained in the forthcoming 1981 Census, and this would include the category "Other Status" as referred to by the Deputy, it is not considered appropriate to include in a census further questions designed to obtain information on marital separation.
I am aware that representations have been made by some social scientists with a view to having information made available on this aspect.
Do I understand the Minister of State to indicate that the Government are not prepared to include in the census form the provision of an extra category of separated status? I am not sure if I heard the reply correctly.
That is right.
Can the Minister give us any reason why he does not think it is appropriate?
There are some very good and obvious reasons, one being that this is not an imposition. It is a census. Every protection should be given to the person who is unfortunate enough to have a marital breakdown and the enumerator should not pry into their private life. The enumerator discusses the paper with the people who are filling it in. We do not want to probe into the very depths of their lives. We have some figures on marital breakdowns in other areas. I have made inquiries and so far as I could find out no other country in Europe includes this question. It is considered that a great many people would take offence at such a question being included in a census of population and would regard it as an unacceptable intrusion into their private affairs. It must be borne in mind further that during the census enumeration in very many instances enumerators give assistance in completing the questionnaire and the inclusion of a question of the kind suggested could lead to verbal exchanges between the enumerators and the householders on this very sensitive subject. Taking all aspects into account it is considered that the inclusion of such questions would give rise to adverse reaction and publicity which could have a serious disadvantageous effect on the census as a whole.
I fully appreciate the wisdom and experience of my constituency colleague in these matters as in many others. I mean that sincerely. I have a high respect for his constituency performance. However, as Minister of State——
We do not have to have long statements.
Lest the Minister's reply might be misinterpreted, perhaps in his official capacity he would confirm for the public record and for the Press Gallery that all the information collected in a census is treated in the strictest confidence. The suggestion that this item might not be treated with the same degree of confidence or would be open to a slightly different interpretation is highly damaging to the census process.
The Deputy has answered his own question. The very fact that this information is highly confidential and must be guarded like all other information means that to include the Deputy's suggestion would destroy that. I know the Deputy does not mean to do that, but that is what he would do. The enumerator would not appear as a friend or an official. He would probably be regarded as a grand inquisitor trying to probe into the private lives of men and women.
I do not wish to be truculent. We need information on this matter. Would the Minister not consider that the lack of statistical data of any kind in this area is hampering any kind of serious and constructive approach to this problem? If the Minister and his Department and the Taoiseach's office have some reservations about a particular phrase or adjective, would they consider suggesting a less offensive one with a view to obtaining the same basic information in a more conciliatory way having regard to the dignity of the people involved?
We would try to see how we could help with any problem but the Deputy is going the wrong way about getting this information in seeking to get it through a census. There may be some other way of getting it but a census is the wrong place to try to get it.
Question No. 6. We have spent 20 minutes on five questions. That is not good enough.
This is not a time and motion study. This is the national Parliament.
The Chair does not mind if only one question is answered but Deputies complain that their questions are not reached. It is the duty of the Chair to see that we make some progress, particularly when unnecessary supplementary questions are being put. The Chair will conduct business in the way he thinks best.
This is a question about a question which will be put to every adult citizen. I appreciate and respect my colleagues' concern——
Will the Deputy please ask a question without making a long statement?
All courtesy banned.
Could the question about separated status be non-obligatory? Would that get over the problem? That would give the individual the right to answer or not to answer and meet the Minister's objection.
There is no sense whatsoever in that.
There is.
There is no sense in that suggestion.
I appreciate the point made by the Minister and I can see its validity. Would consideration be given to putting a supplementary question in the case where persons interviewed say they are married? When the return of people in the house shows that the spouse is absent the simple question could be "Reason for absence of spouse". That would be quite neutral and could be answered without embarrassment. That would produce some information without any embarrassment.
The person could be away on holidays.
That is precisely my point. Most people would be on holiday but it would reveal something of the problem without intruding into people's private affairs.
I do not wish to be rude, but I think these attempts to get information are being put in a very clumsy way.
Question No. 6 is for written reply.
