Vol. 484 No. 4
3 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the way in which he intends to develop the Central Statistics Office as the premier data collection agency in this country in view of the decreasing provision of resources being allocated to it. [19602/97]
The Deputy is presumably referring to the allocation provided for the Central Statistics Office in the 1998 Estimates which in gross terms reflect a decrease of 14 per cent on the 1997 forecast outturn. The original 1997 allocation for the CSO reflected the carry-over cost of processing the 1996 census of population.
When account is taken of this cost, however, there is a small increase in net allocation between 1997 and 1998. Gross expenditure by the CSO rose from £13.8 million in 1995 to £23.8 million in 1996 to cover the costs of the conduct and initial processing of the census.
Does the Minister of State agree that the CSO needs to process further the information it has collected from the 1996 census and to provide information vital for planning at local government level and work being carried out, such as the household budget survey? Does he further agree that, overall, the resourcing of the office does not reflect the commitment of the current Administration to more open government and provision of information?
How does he reconcile the reduction in the Estimates with the increase of £500,000 to the Secret Service, a body which did not even spend its full 1997 allocation? Is it a pointed and relevant comparison that the Government will increase spending on the secret service, yet reduce spending on the provision of information?
I have no information on the Secret Service for the Deputy, which I am sure comes as no surprise to him. A sum of £13.8 million was budgeted for the CSO in 1995 and in 1996 it was £23.8 million. Successive Governments have done their best to substantially resource the office. The CSO is involved in four new big areas of policy, one of which is quarterly surveys which started in September in 39,000 households.
The demographic results from the 1996 census were published in July. The entire process will take approximately two years to complete compared with six years after the 1991 census. It has been speeded up substantially and the office is also engaged in statistical releases on specific topics from time to time. Successive Ministers with responsibility for that office, and the office itself, which is statutorily independent, have made great strides in increasing the statistical database and providing information in a more timely fashion.
I am anxious this is the case as there is no point in it being a few years late. While it is interesting, it is history at that stage. I am as anxious as the Deputy to have useful information for planning purposes and that is why the quarterly national household survey will collect information on education, housing, health, exposure to crime and the labour market. We are getting more accurate and timely information which is useful for planning.
Is the Minister of State aware that the CSO declined to participate in a follow-up survey which was to be carried out in the context of the labour force survey where approximately 2,500 households were surveyed? It revealed for the first time substantial statistically validated evidence that a large number of people claiming unemployment benefit were working while a significant number were registering for unemployment assistance but were not available for work. Is he also aware that, following its publication, the Department of Social Welfare was able to engage in a series of very effective anti-avoidance measures?
The Minister of State said that useful and practical information is required which relates to the operation of the labour market, among other matters. Is he aware of the CSO's professional reluctance to engage in a follow-up survey and, if so, what action does he propose to take as a result of the cost of abuse of the social welfare system and labour market to taxpayers?
I am not aware of any professional reluctance by the CSO to carry out a follow-up study.
It is a professional refusal.
I am not aware of this but I will take it up with the office. All Members have been aware for years of the anomaly between the labour force survey and the live register and we have been going around in circles over it. The introduction in September of the quarterly national household survey, which was prepared by the previous Government, was an attempt to resolve it. The idea behind it was to try to narrow the gap between them and to get more accurate and timely information on the labour force and other topics so that the figures could be reconciled between the labour market and the survey. I would be concerned if there was a reluctance involved and I will take up it up with the office.
For the record, professional staff in the CSO refused to carry out a subsequent survey on the grounds that in some way it compromised their professional position as information gatherers, which was impartial. I earnestly request him to raise this matter with them because the thrust of the parliamentary question is that their role as information gatherers in society must be enhanced and developed and it is essential that that be done.
I share the Deputy's view but the CSO is an independent agency whose integrity must be maintained and it must ensure no one encroaches on it. However, I will inquire about the matter raised by the Deputy.
I look forward to asking a separate parliamentary question on the £500,000 increase for the Secret Service given the reticence of the Minister of State to provide any further information on it.
In regard to the CSO, will he focus on small area statistics which break down statistics on electoral wards and take nearly three years to process? It is an example of where information needs to be processed rapidly? Will this information be available prior to the next local elections or is this another reason for postponing them?
I cannot comment on the date for the local elections.
Why?
The principal demographic results of the 1996 census became available in July. Volumes 1-4 which gives further detailed analysis will be published before the end of the year and then the principal economic results which comprise the huge final volume will be published before the end of 1998. That is still two and a half years between the taking of the census and the publication of all detail.
The 1996 census was published in July 1997, a reasonable timescale, while the 1991 census took six years to complete the cycle. The information to which the Deputy refers, such as the numbers involved in the electoral wards and constituencies, was included in the July publication. I recall a parliamentary question last week where I supplied information on a ward by ward basis in Dublin.
