Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 7 Apr 1981

Vol. 328 No. 6

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - 1981 Census.

5.

asked the Taoiseach the procedures employed in drafting and approving the questions in the 1981 census form.

The topics included in the 1981 census were decided by the Government on the basis of proposals put forward by the Central Statistics Office following consideration by an inter-departmental committee. The format of the questionnaire and actual details of the questions were determined by the Central Statistics Office in the light of their experience in previous censuses and at pilot tests held in 1977 and 1979.

I did not hear clearly the opening part of the reply of the Minister of State. Can he confirm that the form of the questions was drafted by the CSO and approved by his Department?

They were approved by the Government.

Can the Minister of State state if it was Government policy, on seeing the form of that question, particularly in relation to the definition of the various categories of marital status, specifically to exclude inclusion of the category, "separated"?

The Deputy should realise it is Government policy to get the information we want without too much prying.

I am very grateful for that particular advice. Can I take it from what the Minister of State has said that it is not Government policy to get information in relation to this sensitive area since he did not answer the questions?

We are getting the information we want.

Do the Government and the Minister for Justice want to find out what the statistical situation is in relation to the citizens in the State who would qualify for inclusion under the status of "separated" in our census? Do the Government want that statistical information?

We are getting the information we want of the legal status of people.

I can only take it, if I am hearing the Minister of State correctly, that the Government do not want this information.

That is the Deputy's assumption. The Deputy is welcome to that if he wants to take it that way.

These questions might be more appropriate on Question No. 6.

I do not know if the Minister of State has the answer to this but it is something that I would like to ask him, having struggled through my own census form at the weekend. Could the Minister of State tell the House why, having asked nearly what we had for breakfast, the census does not attempt to discover the nationality of the people in the country? It does not make any effort to find out how many foreigners are in the country or what the nationality of any of them is.

I can only state that the form was drawn up after consideration by the Government and the CSO and this was presented as the most suitable form to obtain the information we want.

You need not get excited. There is nothing political in this. I am not aiming at anybody.

I am not worried whether the Deputy is aiming at anybody. I am trying to proceed in an orderly fashion with questions. Ceist 6.

6.

asked the Taoiseach if he will state in respect of page 7 of the explanatory notes of the Census of Ireland, 1981 Form A, Question 5 (iii) Marital Status, which states that the category "Other Status" relates only to persons who have obtained a divorce in another country, whether a person who has obtained a legal separation or a Catholic Church annulment should so indicate their status on this form.

The persons mentioned by the Deputy should be returned as married since, for census purposes, all persons who in civil law are not free to marry, because of a previous marriage, are regarded as married.

Has the explanatory note in the census form, which relates to the fact that people with "other status" can only put down other status where they have obtained a divorce in another country, any legal import and force? What is the legal status of that explanatory note?

I imagine it has got legal status as it is an official document issued by the State.

In the case of a deserted woman, whose former husband has divorced her abroad and he has remarried and is no longer married to her by any stretch of legal or other imagination, why is that woman obliged to put down on the census form "married"?

Because that is her legal status.

Could I implore my colleague, the Minister of State to consider this? In the case of a woman who has been deserted by her husband who has gone to the UK, where he has not only obtained a divorce but remarried, is that woman obliged legally, as would appear from this form, to describe herself as being married?

In the eyes of the law, her status would be married.

Is the Minister of State saying seriously that not only must such a woman describe herself as being married but that if she fails to do so she is committing a statutory offence?

All that is involved is that she is asked to state her legal status.

Like the break-up of the Coalition, the couple might come together again.

This is beyond the comprehension of the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry.

The divorce of the Coalition is beyond everyone's comprehension.

Please, Deputies.

If a woman in the position I have described refuses to describe herself as married for the purpose of the census form, is she leaving herself open to a statutory prosecution?

Without going into specific cases, the general situation is that there are regulations for dealing with cases concerning the filling in of certain forms.

I am calling Deputy Quinn.

I give way in sheer despair.

The Deputy must not despair.

In relation to the supplementaries that have been partly answered by the Minister in respect of Question No. 5, what would be the position if a person's legal status is open to interpretation or confirmation by a court and therefore not clear, as indicated by Deputy Desmond? Can a person, man or woman, but invariably woman, who has been divorced and whose former partner has remarried but is living in this State though not being charged with bigamy by the organs of the State, put down "other status" on the census form and not be guilty of conveying false information?

She would be required to indicate her legal status.

That record is wearing thin. Would the Minister answer the question, please?

The Deputy's record is somewhat thin, also, today.

(Interruptions.)

Because of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

Do I understand the Minister of State to say that the only category of persons who could put themselves under the heading of "other" would be persons who were divorced?

That is the position as outlined in the explanatory memorandum.

The answer I gave was that persons such as those referred to by the Deputy should be returned as married since, for census purposes, all persons who in civil law are not free to marry because of a previous marriage are regarded as married.

I understand that the only person who is entitled to put himself or herself under the heading of "other" is somebody who has been divorced and that other categories such as those mentioned here are ruled out. Is that the case?

I will give the answer again.

I am asking a question.

This is turning into a debate.

We wish to have the matter clarified.

I shall allow a final supplementary from Deputy FitzGerald.

Am I to understand from the Minister's reply that only those who have been divorced are entitled to enter themselves under the heading "other"?

As I have said several times, a person is expected to declare his or her legal status.

But what is the legal status of "other"?

Can the Minister give me a "yes" or a "no" answer?

I am calling Question No. 7.

I have answered the question.

That is not so.

If the word "other" does not mean single and does not mean married what does it mean?

What is the purpose of including the word "other" in the form?

I am calling on the Minister to answer the next question.

7.

asked the Taoiseach (a) the estimated cost of the 1981 census; (b) the estimated number of people appointed as enumerators and supervisors; (c) the number of people already employed who have been appointed; (d) the number appointed from the unemployment register; (e) the reason so few unemployed people were appointed; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

8.

asked the Taoiseach the number of persons, male and female, appointed as census enumerators in north and south Tipperary and County Waterford; the recruitment procedure; and the number of persons appointed who were registered as unemployed.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together.

The total cost of the 1981 census is estimated at £5,500,000.

All appointments to the field staff employed in the 1981 census of population were made on the basis of competitive interviews. Twenty-nine regional supervisors were appointed following a publicly advertised competition in July 1980 and 298 field supervisors were appointed following a publicly advertised competition in September-October 1980. All the supervisory posts are full-time and the question of other employment does not arise. Some 80 of the supervisors were unemployed or needy before appointment.

The total number of enumerators appointed was 3,185. The system of recruitment adopted for these part-time posts commenced with a special competition confined to persons on the live register. Managers of the local offices of the Department of Social Welfare distributed the application forms for the special competition to persons on the live register whom they considered potentially qualified for the positions. The closing date specified for the return of the completed forms to the local offices was 31 October 1980. All the application forms returned by that date were forwarded immediately to the Central Statistics Office. On receipt of the applications in the Central Statistics Office they were reviewed by census officers who short-listed the applicants whom they considered suitable for interview. Arrangements for holding the interviews were then made in co-operation with the National Manpower Service. The interviews were held during the second half of November and the first week in December 1980. The total number of applications received was 1,964 of which 1,531 were short-listed as suitable for interview. Constraints of time and staff resources limited the number of centres at which interviews could be held but it was found possible to call just more than one half of the short-listed applicants for interview by these special boards. The remaining short-listed applicants who could not be given interviews in the special competition were included instead in the open competition described below.

The second recruitment stage followed a publicly advertised open competition in January 1981. All the applicants short-listed in the special competition who could not then be given interviews were called for interview in the open competition. The procedure followed in the open competition provided for offering appointments, where practicable, to qualified unemployed candidates irrespective of their place in the order of merit. The records available for the open competition indicate that nearly 12,000 applicants were interviewed of whom more than 2,000 were unemployed or needy.

Following the competitions described appointments were offered, with priority being given to qualified unemployed persons subject to impeding factors such as the lack of the use of a car in the case of appointment to a rural enumeration area or the prior appointment of an unemployed person to relevant areas.

The total number of enumerators appointed is 3,185. Appointments offered to unemployed or needy persons totalled some 1,200. The number who accepted was 925 of whom 785 were on the live register. From the records it would appear that 929 enumerators had full-time employment and 114 had part-time employment.

Separate figures for appointments in county areas are not available at this stage.

Is the Minister aware that Deputies were informed by the CSO that priority would be given to those on the unemployment list and to the most needy people whereas in the reply just given he tells us that only 925 were appointed from that category? Is the Minister in a position to give a breakdown of the figures in respect of those appointed from the live register and those to whom he refers as the needy? I am asking this because in one instance of which I am aware the person appointed was the wife of a farmer who has 300 acres of land. Is the Minister aware also that numerous people who had been successful in the leaving certificate examination were overlooked?

I regret that not all those appointed were unemployed. One of the first actions I took on this matter was to inform the CSO that we would prefer that where possible unemployed people would be appointed and they assured me that that was done.

Is the Minister telling us that out of 127,000 unemployed persons, it was not possible to find 3,000 who were competent to carry out this work?

The CSO assure me that they took as high a number of unemployed persons as possible. I regret that not all those appointed were unemployed.

Can the Minister explain how from 70 to 80 per cent of those who were appointed happened to be active Fianna Fáil supporters?

(Interruptions.)

Order, please.

Up to 80 per cent of them were active Fianna Fáil supporters and that seems to have been the real criterion for their appointment.

That is a statement.

We know that most people are Fianna Fáil supporters anyway and that in addition they are usually the best people.

Since when? When the Government go to the country, they will find out whether that is the case.

Order, please.

Why, if the Government were concerned that those on the unemployment register should be taken on, was not the decision adopted of going through the register and seeking people who are qualified, because I understand from the Minister's reply that they only dealt with people who applied for jobs rather than going to the register to seek out people? Is that correct?

I think it is the policy to let people apply if they want the jobs.

So, there are unemployed people who could have been employed, who may not have seen the advertisement and who were not even approached about it?

I think they would have applied if they wanted the jobs.

If they had known about them.

They were advertised, of course.

The other question I wanted to ask is, may I take it that the number of unemployed who are now employed at this work accounts for the slowing down in the growth of seasonally adjusted unemployment? Is that correct?

That is outside the scope of the question.

Do the people who have been taken on off the live register——

We are dealing with census returns here.

——account for the slight slowing down in the growth of seasonally adjusted unemployment?

The fact that the live register is down is what matters, not how it is down.

It is not.

It was supposed to be down to 27,000.

In the final process for the selection of enumerators, were they given a course in law so that they could interpret questions of doubt in relation to the legal status of people who might or might not be married?

(Interruptions.)

Would the Minister please answer Ceist 9?

Would the Minister agree that 75 per cent of the people who got the jobs are already in full-time employment?

No, they are not.

Certainly they are. We have 127,000 people unemployed and you could not get 3,000——

The Deputy's party could not even pay to count them.

(Interruptions.)
Top
Share