Liz McManus
Question:2 Ms McManus asked the Taoiseach if he intends to modernise the questions set by the Central Statistics Office in the national census in order that they might relate to modern life and no longer be anachronistic.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Census of Population Format.
The choice of topics and questions for a Census of Population is decided by Government on the basis of proposals by the Central Statistics Office. The Central Statistics Office proposals are made following widespread consultation with other Government Departments and relevant organisations. The choice of topics also fully accords with the recommendations of bodies such as the United Nations Statistical Commission and the Statistical Office of the European Communities.
I am satisfied that the questions included in the most recent census for 1991 are fully in tune with modern Irish life.
The Minister should reconsider the last point he made in his reply. Is he aware that the emphasis that exists in the present census is out of kilter with modern life? I wish to bring to his attention a number of points. In relation to the concept of head of household, it is time we dealt with terminology which reflects the way people live and not out-dated concepts. Would the Minister accept that the emphasis in the census form is on the car owner, the person who is at work or at school? It pays scant regard to the person who is unemployed despite the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of people unemployed at present. For example, there is no question relating to how people travel to the dole office. Questions are asked about how people travel to work but it is important to ask people how difficult or otherwise it is to get to the dole office.
There are no questions about how women carry on their daily lives, whether they are at home, how long it takes them to get to the supermarket or how far they are from their doctor. Those are simple questions that relate directly to the way people live. Does the Minister not feel that the census provides an opportunity to ascertain the complexity of modern life rather than concentrating on the traditional, the man at work?
Finally, while we are asking people whether they speak the Irish language there is an opportunity to assess how many people here speak a European language, apart from Irish or English.
The question concerning the head of household is simply to ensure that somebody takes responsibility for filling out the form. I accept there may be other ways of referring to that person. An alternative formulation used by the labour force survey is "reference person". This suggestion could be examined in relation to the next census which is due to be carried out in 1996.
With regard to car owners, workers and the position of women, it would be more appropriate if those questions were handled in a detailed way such as that carried out by the labour force survey. It would be difficult to cover every possible question raised by the Deputy in relation to the census form.
In regard to the unemployed, Question No. 19 relates to a person's status, whether one is at work, seeking regular work or unemployed. It is difficult to include all of that detail in this survey. Part of the process of carrying out these surveys is to compare them with previous surveys to determine what changes are taking place.
In regard to European languages, I would be happy to pass on that and any other suggestions the Deputy may have to the Central Statistics Office.
Does the Minister recognise there are detailed questions already on the census form concerning people at work or at school? That emphasis implies that certain people matter sufficiently to have their lifestyle queried and assessed while others do not. If we really want to know about Irish life through the census — which is not a survey — we must treat people equally and understand the way they are living now.
The Deputy must proceed by way of supplementary question, not by way of statement or argument.
For a Government which is committed to equal status legislation the use of the term "head of household" is demeaning, offensive and would perhaps be challengeable under equal status legislation.
The Deputy has made her point. She is now attempting to argue and debate the issue.
It should not be beyond the ability of this Government to find an alternative term that is not offensive.
I would not take advice from the Minister for Social Welfare if I were the Minister.
It is always good sound advice. In relation to the head of household the Deputy is aware that either person can be so described.
That is beside the point.
The Deputy is referring to the motivation behind the census.
One must have joint ownership to avoid the probate tax.
What happened to partnership?
The term "head of household" is not intended to denigrate other members of a household. It is a term of convenience. It is difficult to answer all of the Deputy's concerns. I understand totally many of those concerns in relation to the head of household. The use of those terms could be examined and I will pass on the Deputy's views to the Central Statistics Office.
In relation to the unemployed the statistics gathered from those surveys are used to improve our society and improve the plight of the unemployed. There are long term benefits for the people mentioned in the Deputy's comments.
Would the Minister not agree that he is being somewhat disingenuous to refer to the term "head of household" as simply a term of convenience? Would he agree it implies a particular status of one person in that house as being superior to the other whether that be male or female and, therefore, is inappropriate for use in official documents? In relation to the Minister's argument that too many questions on the census form make it over complicated, would he not consider dealing with some aspects of what is being proposed in a census for information other than on a five yearly basis? In other words, particular aspects could be selected on a year to year basis and a census carried out on those issues.
I would remind the Deputy that the labour force survey is carried out on an annual basis.
That is a survey, not a census.
The information obtained is of tremendous value. The head of household can be any member of a private household present on the census night who would take responsibility for filling up the form. I accept the Deputy's point in relation to the possibility of using other terminology. As I have said, the term "reference person" is used in the labour force survey. I will certainly take the Deputy's view on board.
The question relating to a survey versus a census is an important one. Virtually everybody agrees that the labour force survey is inadequate because it is simply a random survey whereas a census seeks information about every single adult in the State. Most people dealing with labour force matters are urging that a census of the labour force be carried out on a regular basis rather than merely having this survey. If a change is to take place it should be on that basis.
I would be glad to take suggestions on board in relation to the preparation of the next survey to be carried out in 1996. As I said, one of the problems is comparability with the last survey and in changing some of the terminology we may not have the correct mechanism to compare the existing census with the previous one. However, the Government is open to any suggestion regarding the compilation of the next census.
Deputy McManus rose.
The Deputy had a very good innings and was given some latitude. She must put a brief and relevant question.
Since the Minister has given a commitment to assess the census information, would he consider examining the whole area of who is minding the children? There is no reference in the document relating to anything other than schools. It does not refer to pre-schools, nurseries or anything to do with the care of small children. This question is frequently asked of Deputies so perhaps the Minister could find out who is minding the children?
The Deputy is going on at length.
Any suggestions made will certainly be considered.