Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:1 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the manner in which the numbers of overseas visitors to Ireland are estimated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29233/07]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Tourism Industry.
The Central Statistics Office estimates the number of overseas visitors to Ireland using actual passenger numbers supplied by the airport authorities and shipping companies combined with a large-scale sample survey conducted in Irish airports and seaports. The country of residence survey is a continuous large-scale sample survey where incoming and departing passengers are interviewed. This provides country of residence breakdowns for passengers which are applied to the total passenger numbers, giving estimates of overseas visitors to Ireland as well as Irish visits abroad.
The survey was redesigned in 2005 in line with international best practice. The sample size of the country of residence survey in 2006 was slightly more than 665,500 passengers, equating to an overall sampling fraction of more than 2% of all passengers. The most recent results from the overseas travel release to the end of December 2007 showed trips to Ireland totalled 8,012,200 compared to 7,709,000 in the same period in 2006, an increase of 3.9%.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I have raised this issue on a number of occasions and I require clarification. Are the figures for overseas visitors based solely on the numbers entering this jurisdiction through airports and seaports with no distinction drawn between actual visitors and Irish people returning home? This was the case and if it is still the case, it means the figures are not at all indicative of the true factual position.
Does the Minister of State accept that Irish people travel overseas in ever greater numbers and their return journeys are included as numbers accessing Ireland? Has any examination or methodology other than the return of numbers entering via airports and seaports been explored, employed or considered in order to have a more accurate picture of the real throughput of visitor numbers? Does the CSO co-operate with Tourism Ireland in determining numbers? Will the Minister of State consider evaluating hotel, bed and breakfast and other accommodation bed-night numbers as a more certain indication of the real numbers visiting our shores on an annual basis?
These figures reflect only visitor numbers coming through airports and seaports across the Twenty-six Counties. The Minister of State indicated previously that of necessity progress will be made on having an all-island approach to determine the true statistical visitor numbers and that the ports of Larne and Belfast and Belfast City and Belfast International Airports would all be included. The numbers already cited, which I believe are inaccurate, are further skewed given that a significant and perhaps growing number of visitors enter the island of Ireland through Northern access points. Will the Minister of State indicate what progress has been made in this regard? Will he come clean on the accuracy of the figures he presented? Does he agree with this Deputy that the figures are not reliable?
To answer the first question, Deputy Ó Caoláin is correct to state the figures include Irish people returning home. Two sample surveys are done on passengers. The first is the country of residence survey which asks two questions, namely, where people are from and the number of trips they made abroad. The second is the passenger card inquiry, PCI. These are carried out by the CSO.
The country of residence survey provides estimates of the number of inbound and outbound passengers to the Republic of Ireland by country of residence. The PCI provides additional information regarding reasons for journeys, ticket type and expenditure. The country of residence survey is used to provide analysis of arriving and departing passengers by country of residence and the survey is conducted at the airports in Dublin, Cork, Shannon, Knock and Kerry and the ports at Rosslare, Ringaskiddy, Dún Laoghaire and Dublin. This selection is done in such a way as to ensure proper representation of airport and port pairing, day and night and weekday and weekend flights and sailings. On selected sailings and flights, a one in five systematic sample of passengers is selected and their countries of residence are recorded by a CSO interviewer.
Sample results are grossed up to total passenger numbers travelling from each airport and port pairing in the Republic of Ireland as provided by the airports and ferry companies. Where an airport and port pairing was not covered in a survey month, results are imputed on the basis of nearest neighbour. The survey allows the CSO to measure the number of non-Irish residents travelling into the Republic of Ireland and the number of Irish residents travelling abroad. As the country of residence survey does not establish the reason for an individual's trip or length of stay, those travelling for reason of remuneration for more than one year to this country cannot be excluded.
Deputy Ó Caoláin has previously raised the matter of co-operation between North and South. Apart from joint work on statistical reports, such as Ireland North and South A Statistical Profile, active contact also takes place between the statistical authorities North and South on matters of common interest. Unlike in the Republic where most surveys are conducted and published by the CSO, in Northern Ireland's statistical system many departments have responsibility for publishing the official statistics on a given topic. In the case of tourism, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board has responsibility for collection and the CSO is in regular contact with its officials.
A great deal more co-operation is taking place since we last spoke on this matter. I inquired about this issue and the Northern Ireland Tourist Board will conduct a pilot scheme similar to our country of residence procedure. It is vital to have co-operation on tourism and that our tourism board uses the material compiled. The bottom line is that the figures show that in December 2007 trips to Ireland totalled 8,012,200 compared to 7,709,000 in 2006. This is the most relevant figure.
Comparing the first three quarters of 2006 to the first three quarters of 2007, one sees that visitors from Great Britain decreased by 1%, those from the USA and Canada increased by 1% and the number of visitors from other European countries increased by 15%. The number of those visiting from other areas increased by 2.5%. This shows an increase in visitors from Europe which is extremely positive. These figures are vital for our tourist bodies and are used to focus on where the markets need to be improved.
Does the Minister of State agree a far more scientific approach to determining these figures must be found? It is as reasonable to suggest the travel numbers from this island to the neighbouring island may have reduced, that more Irish people go to Europe on holidays and their return from destinations such as France, Spain and Portugal could explain the 15% increase. I do not mean to discredit the statistics. I understand the limitations, but another method must be found. Does the Minister of State agree that all-island analysis and co-operation is required and will he undertake to address this matter with the CSO and the tourist bodies and enable us to have confidence in the figures?
I was concerned to note that last September the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs with responsibility for integration policy, Deputy Conor Lenihan, indicated the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals here. He instanced his view of the Polish population in this State. Does the Minister of State recall his suggestion that the number of Polish residents in this jurisdiction was more of the order of 160,000 to 200,000 than the 62,495 reported in the 2006 census? On what was the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, basing his figures?
A Cheann Comhairle, this relates to the next set of questions.
A Cheann Comhairle, are we dealing with Questions Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive?
We are dealing with Question No. 1 only. However, we are beginning to stray a little, to say the least, Deputy Ó Caoláin.
With the Ceann Comhairle's indulgence I will conclude with the point that it is important that we have statistical accuracy across the board. That is the correlation I am drawing with the statistics of the Central Statistics Office. I would appreciate the Minister of State's comments on this. Is it possible that our census statistics and report are as inaccurate as the figures he has already shared with us on annual visitor numbers to this State?
The Deputy's last question, as other colleagues have pointed out, is the subject of the next set of questions. I look forward to dealing with the accuracy of the census figures in some detail then. I stand by the very good work by the Central Statistics Office, CSO. I will convey the Deputy's views to our friends in the CSO on the need for more work on the detail of the census figures.
Concerning people coming from, as we call it "other Europe", an element of that consists of Irish people coming back. There is a greater two-way flow between many new accession states and ourselves because of the large numbers of residents from those countries who have come to Ireland to live and work. I will deal with this issue in the next set of questions.
Has the Minister of State looked at systems to estimate visitor numbers in other countries? Are they the same as ours or do we have a special system?
The most basic way of examining visitor numbers is through passenger figures supplied by the airport authorities and shipping companies. After that, one has to dig deeper for specific information.
I know that and I accept the Minister of State may not have the information I am seeking to hand.
I will raise the matter with the CSO. There is much contact between ourselves and the relevant agency in Northern Ireland — they do things differently there — and other statistical bodies in EU member states.
Census of Population.
Eamon Gilmore
Question:2 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied the level of immigration as recorded in the last census was accurate, having regard to views (details supplied) that the census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals living here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20597/07]
Denis Naughten
Question:3 Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied the recent census gives an accurate record of the number of non-Irish nationals resident here; his plans to commission research in this area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22418/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:4 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to concerns expressed that the last census does not give an accurate record of the number of immigrants in the State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29232/07]
Lucinda Creighton
Question:5 Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied the last census has accurately recorded the number of non-Irish nationals living here; his views on whether there are significantly more living here than was recorded; the measures he will adopt to deal with this discrepancy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29518/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive, together.
As the census is fundamental to planning the future of the country, it is extremely important it is conducted in a professional manner. The CSO employed a field force of close to 5,000 persons, of whom 4,400 were enumerators, to undertake a comprehensive field operation over nine weeks in April and May 2006.
Individual and household forms were available in both English and Irish and could be completed in either of the two official languages. To facilitate recent immigrants, translations of census forms were provided in 11 foreign languages: Arabic, Czech, Chinese, French, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian and Spanish. Respondents could study the language version of their choice while completing either the English or Irish language form.
The enumerated population in April 2006 amounted to 4.24 million persons, representing an increase of 323,000 persons, 8.2% compared with the April 2002 figure. The 2006 census form contained 34 questions relating to individuals which included questions on usual residence, nationality and place of birth. Of the 4.17 million usually resident persons present in the State on 23 April 2006, 420,000, 10%, had a nationality other than Irish, an increase from 224,000, 5.8%, four years earlier.
By comparing the results of successive censuses and making due allowance for the number of births and deaths which occurred in the intervening period it is possible to derive a measure of net migration, that is the difference between inward and outward migration. Between 2002 and 2006 the estimated net immigration flow was 191,000, representing a figure of 47,800 on an average annual basis. It is estimated that just over two thirds of this net inflow occurred in the two years following the accession of the ten new member states to the EU in May 2004.
On the basis of the census results, the CSO estimates between 2004 and 2006 our population increased by approximately 1.6% per annum due to migration alone. Such a rate of growth is unprecedented in our history and is also large by international standards. For example, the corresponding rate in the UK, where there was also significant immigration due to the EU accession, is estimated to have been about a quarter of the Irish level.
On the basis of this rate of net immigration, the CSO estimates the labour force grew by approximately 5% per annum in the two years before the census. This is a high growth rate by any standards and, given the strong link between migration and the labour force, a higher rate of immigration would have resulted in an implausibly high growth in employment.
On the basis of the care with which the census was undertaken and an overall assessment of the results, I am satisfied it provides an accurate measure of the level of the non-Irish national population in April 2006. Suggestions to the contrary are largely based on a misunderstanding of the difference between migrant flows and the population stock. The flow data are much higher as they include many short-term movements, both inward and outward, which do not add to the stock figures.
This issue was addressed in a statistical release issued in December 2007 entitled, Foreign Nationals: PPSN Allocations and Employment, 2002-2006. It showed just under half of the 447,200 non-Irish nationals aged 15 years and over who were allocated a PPSN between 2002 and 2005 had employment in the State in 2006, according to Revenue P35 end-of-year returns. A comparison of the published census data and the Revenue P35 data for non-Irish nationals indicates a high degree of consistency between both sources. The CSO will continue to monitor all relevant sources to ensure the accuracy of its ongoing population and migrations estimates.
I am happy with the degree of coherence between the various CSO data sources dealing with non-Irish nationals and, specifically, with the accuracy of the recent census results relating to these numbers.
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. Will he accept that accurate census figures are absolutely essential for planning infrastructure, housing and education?
Does the Government stand over the 2006 census figures? The Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, rubbished the census figures on immigrants and non-nationals working and living in Ireland. When challenged both in and outside the House, he repeated his claims. Has the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, asked his source of information? If Deputy Conor Lenihan's claims are accepted, then the figures are inaccurate. Has the Minister of State any proposals to change the census compilation methodology?
I stand over the CSO's figures. Just looking at the detail and amount of preparation for the census, the CSO's staff are to be commended. They delivered questionnaires to 1.5 million dwellings. As Deputies know, there were 400 field supervisors and 4,400 enumerators. The CSO, following consultation with the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, pursued a number of cases in which households refused outright to co-operate.
There are a number of key points. I know from my contacts with the CSO that it is confident that its census coverage was close to the targeted 100%, to the extent that if there was any under-enumeration of the population it would be no more than 1%, or around 40,000 persons. From the feedback received from field staff, it was considered highly unlikely that non-Irish nationals would have accounted for more than 10,000 of this conjectured under-enumeration. The amount of work was enormous. For example, the figure that emerged with regard to the Polish population on census night was 63,276. The work was detailed and required much preparation, and a large number of staff was required. I stand by the figures that were given to me. I agree it is vital that we have accurate figures for the purposes of planning.
Would the Minister of State agree that there was general acceptance of the accuracy of the census figures and that this matter would not have arisen at all were it not for his colleague's publicly made statement that they were rubbish? Has the Minister of State talked to the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, about this or instructed him on the accuracy of the figures, if he is satisfied as to their accuracy? Did he check whether the Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, in fact had some special information that was not available to the Minister of State and the CSO?
While I am on my feet I will ask another question. How did the enumerators deal with gated communities? As somebody who likes calling to people's houses, I have found no method of reaching people who are inside the gates, especially in blocks that have swipe-card entrances. If there is a button, one can pester them long enough for them to come out, but I do not know how the census enumerators count these people. Did they leave them out and guess how many were inside? Usually there are only one or two people in each unit. I did not see any sign of large families.
The Minister of State on whether the Minister of State for integration has special agents.
I have not managed to speak to the Minister of State as we are all very busy, but obviously after this debate we will be having a discussion. To be fair to the Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, there is the issue of migrant flows, as I mentioned in my own contribution, of which we are all conscious.
He is mixed up, is he?
A person can get the impression from the migrant flows that there are more Polish people, for example, in the country than there are really. I have given the factual position. The Minister of State in question, as I understand from his article, was speaking outside the Dáil about his contacts with various organisations representing immigrant bodies.
In the case of gated communities and private apartment blocks, which is, as the CSO knows from some of its other surveys, a growing phenomenon, the field supervisors contacted management companies to obtain access codes. One of the duties of the enumerators was to list in their record books every building capable of being occupied. They were all given a certain number of apartments or houses to visit, and on census night they marked each building on an up-to-date map. They also had to make contact with householders over a nine-week period in April and May, first to distribute blank census forms and then to collect the completed forms. Given the increasing complexity of Irish society, with more people at work and greater mobility, the enumerators made extensive use of calling cards in cases in which contact with householders was not easy to achieve. The CSO issued each of the enumerators with a mobile phone whose number was printed on his or her calling card to facilitate texting or telephoning by the householder to inform the enumerator of the best time to reach the householder at home. Where contact proved very difficult, the CSO allowed mailing of forms. Around 16,000 forms were posted back to the CSO. Every enumerator had a select number of houses or apartments to visit. I accept there are new issues for enumerators with regard to gated communities.
I thought they might have a solution to a problem that we all have.
We all have that problem in our political lives. Maybe we could learn from the census staff with regard to access to gated communities.
The Minister of State said in his response "to be fair to Deputy Lenihan". The Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, is quoted as saying that it is pretty much acknowledged in Government circles that the figures were a huge underestimate. Who is talking rubbish here? Is it Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, or Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan?
It is the two of them.
Both of them cannot be telling the truth. Is it not the case that the Minister of State Deputy Lenihan's comments constitute an allegation either that the Polish community here was dishonest and was in serious breach of the law or that the enumerators were not up to the job? Which is it? Both of these are serious allegations. The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, is telling us that he has not asked the Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, where he got his figures from or sought clarity from him on this issue. I put it to the Minister of State that his colleague has questioned the competency of the CSO. He made these comments last September and they have not since been clarified.
I would expect that enumeration of illegal migrants would be more difficult as these people do not rush to the door when they hear a knock. What specific steps were taken to obtain a figure for illegal migrants? Does this represent the 1% estimate given by the CSO of the number of people that were not actually included in the figures?
I made it clear at the outset that I totally stand by the CSO figures. I made the case with regard to——
Does that mean that Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, is talking rubbish?
I am just suggesting that——
One follows from the other.
The Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, spoke based on his contacts with immigrant groups. As I mentioned, one possible explanation for what he suggested — he was not speaking in the House——
It does not make any difference where he was speaking. He said that in Government circles it was pretty much acknowledged that the figures were off the wall.
He was not speaking with the knowledge of the figures that I have. I suggested that his opinion was possibly based on migrant flows. I also made the point that figures released on PPS numbers showed that just under half of the 447,200 non-Irish nationals aged 15 or over who were allocated a PPS number between 2002 and 2005 had employment in the State in 2006. There is obviously an issue with regard to PPS numbers and their reflection of the number of people really working here, as we are all aware. I am bringing actual figures before the House today. As I also stated, the possible error was as little as 1%. This is shown in the extensive data that I have presented as best I can to the House. I am standing by these figures. There are no two ways about it.
In light of the fact that the Minister of State is standing by the figures, will he ask his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, to apologise to the enumerators and to the Polish community for the aspersions he cast on their characters?
My colleague said he believed that last year's census gave a serious underestimation of certain figures. He is entitled to a view if he is speaking outside the House. I am also entitled to give——
It does not make any difference where he is speaking.
Deputy Naughten is being very hard on the Minister of State. He has a view about this.
He made a serious allegation. It does not matter where he made it.
I am bringing clarity to it. He is a good colleague of mine and he is entitled to express his views.
The next time he is around Deputies can ask him about it.
The reason I brought up this point during Question No. 1 was that I thought the grouping was Questions Nos. 1 to 5. I apologise. I was not pre-empting these questions. Due to the noise during the exit after Leaders' Questions I did not hear the grouping of the questions and I made the assumption that these questions would be lumped together.
I thank the Minister for his response but——
Now we understand.
The Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, has responsibility for integration.
He obviously thinks he has a bigger job than he does.
Whatever about it, he is not here anyway.
Is he integrating at a rate beyond the awareness of the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, and his colleagues? We are talking about anything between 100,000 and 140,000 people of Polish origin alone. I wonder if Deputy Lenihan had offered his opinion, how many more hundreds of thousands of people of other nationalities he had secreted in other parts of the jurisdiction. In response to Deputy Naughten the Minister of State made a suggestion but, watching him, I have no doubt the Minister of State was thinking that Deputy Conor Lenihan was talking through his hat.
That is an acute observation but Deputies must ask questions during Question Time.
Can the Minister of State confirm that?
We speak of the undocumented in respect of Irish emigrants to the United States most particularly. Is there any method employed to gauge the numbers of undocumented in this country, particularly when one couples the CSO report on the census in 2006 with the information exposed this morning as very questionable? I refer to the number of visitors coming to our shores via airport and seaport access points. We have no idea of the numbers of people who access this jurisdiction on a North-South basis, coming through the ports of Larne, Belfast and the respective airports. What is the Minister of State proposing to get some sense of the percentage represented in respect of the undocumented people?
I will give a very brief answer regarding the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Conor Lenihan.
He was talking through his hat.
I am reminded of Salvador Dali, who said: "I will be so brief I have already finished."
A dangerous thing in politics.
The Minister of State, Deputy Lenihan, does not wear a hat. I know that for certain.
Maybe he should.
The best way to deal with the undocumented is through our embassies abroad. I have personal experience of it and it is a valid point in regard to the numbers, the contacts and the support network. I will raise the matter with the CSO on the Deputy's behalf.
Legislative Programme.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:6 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the legislation committee; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27529/07]
The Government legislation committee which I chair is an ad hoc body that has operated since 1985. It assists me in a practical way in compiling accurate information about the current status of legislation in preparation so that I can report to Government through the Taoiseach. It enables me to plan each Dáil session based on reports and information from the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel and Departments. Prior to the beginning of each Dáil session the committee, in consultation with Departments and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, assists me in preparing the legislative programme for that Dáil session, which is then approved by the Government and published. The programme is the main output of the committee.
The committee also assists me on an ongoing basis in discharging my functions in regard to implementation of the legislative programme in ensuring a steady flow of legislation in the Houses. A key function of the committee is to identify and remove any blockages that may occur in the drafting and other preparatory stages. Through the work of the committee I am in a position to provide up to date information to the Taoiseach so he can respond to the many requests he receives from Deputies in the House about progress in the drafting of promised legislation. The committee does not address the substantive issues of the legislation, which are matters for the sponsoring Departments.
The committee, which meets every few weeks, comprises the Attorney General, Chief Parliamentary Counsel, programme managers for each of the parties in Government, the Leader of the Seanad and a principal officer from the Department of the Taoiseach. Other officials and advisors attend as appropriate and, from time to time, Ministers attend to clarify their legislative priorities.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply, which referred to meeting on an ongoing basis and ensuring a steady flow of legislation. Does the Minister of State not agree we have had anything but a steady flow of legislation before this House since the general election last May? In fact the contrary is the case. Can the Minister of State tell us, as he has suggested, that the committee meets on an ongoing basis to assist the Minister of State in prioritising legislation and addressing barriers to legislative progress? When did it last meet? How often has it met since the publication of the legislative programme for the current session? How many times did it meet between the resumption after the summer recess and the Christmas break? What exactly does "ongoing basis" translate as?
Can the Minister of State confirm that the committee recommends to Cabinet which legislation should receive priority? If that is the case, can the Minister of State clarify that when Deputies use the opportunity on the Order of Business to appeal, urge and highlight the need to have legislation speeded up because of specific need, greater demand or urgencies presenting that these calls by elected representatives are noted and addressed by the legislative committee? If not, why not?
The Opposition has responsibilities regarding the processing of legislation and the speedy passage of legislation through the Dáil. From time to time the Opposition wants to give additional time to certain Bills, for very good reasons in most cases. The Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) Bill is a good example. The Labour Party sought additional time to debate it and we granted it. As Chief Whip I could give many examples of debates on Bills where I granted additional time following requests from the Opposition. One must also consider the committee process and Seanad involvement. The length of time given to Bills is not simply a question of responsibility of the Government.
I have already answered the Deputy on the beginning of a new Dáil. Ministers must prioritise their legislation. In the last Dáil we enacted 209 Bills. Coming back to Government with new partners we had a clean sheet environment and this is part and parcel of a certain degree of the preparation that took place in the first session. We are now into a free-flowing system of legislation. It is not my job to list the Bills that are being taken but they include the Student Support Bill, the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill and the social welfare Bill. Many more have been outlined and we intend to publish them this session on section A of the Government legislative list. This will be dealt with on the Order of Business if required. A clear system of information is available to Opposition Deputies, who can ask questions.
I cannot give the exact number of meetings of the committee. We meet as necessary and I keep a close watch on that. My reply refers to meeting every few weeks and it is certainly very regularly. I can provide the Deputy with the information if it is of interest to him. The purpose is to keep legislation flowing and keep Ministers focused. They address the committee when required. My job is to keep it going and I am satisfied that we are in that situation now. I am conscious that I must work closely with Ministers but there is a good degree of free-flowing legislation and there is more online.
Does the Minister of State accept that making the claim that the Government came back after the 29th Dáil with a clean sheet is absolute nonsense? Does he not accept that there is a continuing delay in respect of health legislation? I do not need to list them but the nurses and midwives Bill and the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill are from the last Dáil and have not been addressed 12 months later. Does the Minister of State accept that these are urgent requirements that the legislative committee should be highlighting? That is urgent and the committee should press the Department of Health and Children and the Minister, Deputy Harney, to have this legislation brought forward. Like every other Deputy, I would like to know the number of times and the dates of the sittings of the legislative committee in order to understand its work.
While we accept it is the Government's prerogative to propose the business of the House and the legislative programme, the 209 Bills passed by the last Dáil gave rise to a record number of guillotines being applied to standard, and not emergency or special, legislation. Half of the number of guillotines used since the foundation of the State were used in the last seven years. Given that there are flaws in the system and that people such as the Opposition Whips are left out of it, will the Minister consider including them in the planning of the legislative programme for the year, rather than for a week? It would give an opportunity to the Opposition spokespersons to prepare and would perhaps result in better informed debate in the Chamber. That is not to suggest that the debate is not well informed but there would be improved debate arising from better planning.
With regard to the number of Bills passed by the last Dáil and the use of the guillotine, we used the guillotine where necessary. Invariably it happened towards the end of a session. I accept that we should try to avoid the use of the guillotine as far as possible and I have endeavoured to do that. We have listened carefully to Deputy Stagg, Deputy Paul Kehoe and Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh at the Whips meetings regarding the need to give extra time to legislation and, indeed, debates on various issues. We are doing that this week on the pharmacy issue.
With regard to giving notice about what is scheduled for the next few weeks, I gave the Deputy an undertaking that we will consider that. At present, we give the Whips notice of what is scheduled for the following week but priorities change from time to time.
The Minister is very generous; that is a week's notice.
We give notice on the basis that it is important for the Opposition spokespersons.
We know on Thursday what is coming up on Tuesday and Wednesday.
However, I will examine the matter and we will discuss it at the Whips meeting.