asked the Taoiseach the number of people estimated to have emigrated during the first nine months of 1989; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
8.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Emigration Statistics.
7.
asked the Taoiseach if he will give the emigration figures for the last three years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement on the trend indicated and the implications thereof.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together. In the absence of comprehensive documentary or other administrative procedures relating to the movement of persons into and out of the State, estimates of the net balance between inward and outward flows in the 12 month period to mid-April are made annually using current population estimates and data on births and deaths. Estimates are not available for periods other than the 12 months to mid-April. The estimates for the three most recent periods are as follows:
|
Year to |
Estimated Net |
|
Mid-April |
Outward Migration |
|
1987 |
27,000 |
|
1988 |
32,000 |
|
1989 |
46,000 |
I assume the Minister will now go out and dress himself in sackcloth and ashes for having to admit to an emigration rate of 46,000 people up to April. Combined with the revelation yesterday that the numbers at work are down considerably, will the Minister now indicate what steps his Government are taking to stem this haemorrhage of 1,000 people a week from this country.
The emigration trend has continued to increase since 1984 and unfortunately the figure has reached 46,000 in the period to which I have referred. With regard to future trends, due to the vast improvement in the economic conditions, it is reliably forecast by no less than the ESRI that emigration trends will reduce rapidly during 1990.
Because they will all be gone.
At this point we are dealing merely with a statistical reply and I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that fully.
I want to bring in Deputy Mervyn Taylor who has a question tabled in this regard.
The statistics concern 46,000 people.
The Minister has not dealt with the aspect of my question where I asked him to make a statement on the trend indicated and the implications of that trend. What does that trend indicate and what are the implications? Will the Minister agree that the substantial percentage increases year on year his own figures show indicate an abject failure of Government policies in the economic field in relying almost totally on the private sector to create employment for these young people who are now forced to leave our shores, and that it constitutes a most appalling blood letting of the people and population of this country?
As the Deputy will appreciate, there has been a very major increase in the labour force in recent years due to the very large number of people leaving school. The trend to which we are referring did not commence during the lifetime of this Government or that of the last Government. It commenced in 1984.
This trend is during your Government.
In the early eighties——
It has doubled in the past few years.
——from 1982 to 1986 some of the increases from year to year were more substantial percentage-wise than they are today. We are not discussing politics and I do not wish to bring politics into this.
(Interruptions.)
That is a sound judgment.
The Taoiseach might get away with that, but surely his curate does not expect to get away with it.
Let us hear the Minister of State out without any interruptions please.
As I have already indicated——
(Interruptions.)
When Deputies ask questions they should do the Minister the courtesy of listening to his reply.
I was about to say that it is reliably forecast by the ESRI and other bodies that employment will increase and consequently emigration will be reduced substantially and will be seen to be reduced from next year onwards.
Is the Minister not aware that the labour force survey yesterday indicated that the numbers at work had fallen by 17,000?
(Interruptions.)
The Deputy must be aware that he interrupted the Minister in his reply.
The Minister obviously does not know what he is talking about.
If the Minister has concluded, I am calling on Deputy Michael Noonan for a final supplementary.
I will ask a statistical supplementary, since it is a statistical question. The Minister is no doubt aware that yesterday's publication of the labour force survey up to April last showed a drop in the labour force of 17,000. The Minister is also aware that his Government's national plan says that the natural increase in the labour force is 25,000. Adding 17 and 25 the total is 42. Children under 18 years of age and women who are not on the live register do not appear in the labour force figures. In view of that will the Minister agree that the estimate for emigration of 46,000 up to April of last year is understated and that it is quite clear that emigration was somewhere between 50,000 and 60,000? Will the Minister ask the CSO to revise their emigration estimates and give us the real picture for emigration?
The CSO are exploring the possibility of obtaining this type of information in a different way altogether. A pilot scheme which will hopefully commence next year will be carried out.
There will be nobody left at that stage.
We hope that emigration figures will be more accurate, but we are dealing at the moment with figures that are not 100 per cent accurate.
They are being understated at this stage.
They are based on procedures already outlined. The economic conditions for growth are now in place, and there is no reason why——
For growth in emigration.
——we should now see a much greater improvement in job creation and a resultant drop in emigration. Finally, I would also point out——
Can I ask the Minister——
(Interruptions.)
Order.
We all know that many people emigrate for reasons other than to seek employment.
I want to deal with other questions.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I wish to ask——
Order. I ask the Deputies who are standing to please be very brief. I observe Deputy FitzGerald also.
In view of the statement by the Minister for Labour last year shortly after the Minister's statement in the House with regard to emigration of 32,000 when he indicated that trends were now downward, that emigration was decreasing, how does the Minister account for the fact that officially emigration figures now stand at 46,000?
This is leading to a lot of argument.
The figures we are dealing with today are figures up to mid-April 1989. The trend since then has shown a vast improvement. In the first nine months of this year the number of redundancies in comparison to the number in 1987 is down 41 per cent.
(Interruptions.)
Job creation is down also.
My question has to do with statistics. If one did not change even the method of statistical calculation, is the Minister aware that we are now just 9,000 short of the highest figure in any year since the State was founded, that we are 9,000 short of the figure in the year 1955, and that the proportionate increase between 1988 and 1989 means that in 1990 the largest number of people will have emigrated since the State was founded? Will the Minister comment on that?
Having regard to the questions before me, that supplementary question is irrelevant. The Deputy is going back 30 years and it is totally irrelevant.
Deputy Garret FitzGerald.
I am not. This is a disgrace.
A final question.
Would the Minister not agree that the figures show that emigration has virtually doubled since Fianna Fáil came into office in March 1987; secondly, that it is the highest figure since an earlier occasion when Fianna Fáil also had been three years in office and emigration was also around 46,000; thirdly, that the figures disclose a population decrease of 21,000 and, fourthly, that as the employment forecasts now have to be revised substantially downwards in view of yesterday's employment figures, it is not tenable to reduce the ESRI employment figures as evidence that emigration is going to fall?
I would point out to Deputy FitzGerald that during his period as Taoiseach emigration increased by 250 per cent——
Never mind the percentage, give the numbers.
The Deputy is dealing with figures and so am I.
I am dealing with people, not percentages.
Let us have Question No. 9, please.