asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied with the accuracy of the industrial productions statistics and the trade figures published by the CSO.
2.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers - Central Statistics Office.
1.
asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied with the reliability of our economic statistics as published.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
I am satisfied that the economic statistics published by the CSO meet a very high standard of reliability and compare fully, in this respect, with those published by statistical offices in other countries. As Deputies familiar with statistical material will be aware, this does not mean that statistics once published will never have to be revised. It is recognised professionally that all statistics are subject to some margin of error. This margin will vary, in particular, with the method of collection. The CSO frequently includes in the publication of statistics indications of the degree of reliability of particular figures or sets of figures.
Has the attention of the Taoiseach been drawn to press reports of statements attributed to Mr. John Lynch, Director of the Irish Computer Centre, in which he suggests that the trade figures may be unreal. Would the Taoiseach care to comment on that statement?
I am not familiar with the statement nor do I understand what is meant by the word "unreal" in that context.
I should draw Deputy Haughey's attention to the fact that quotations are not permitted at Question Time.
I am not going to quote anything. Is the Taoiseach aware that this statement appeared in The Irish Times on 13 October? Mr. Lynch explained very clearly what he meant and indicated that in his view the figures at that point were somewhat unreliable.
Is the Deputy asking a further question?
As the Taoiseach indicated he did not know about the statement or what was meant by "unreal", is he aware that this statement was on the front page of The Irish Times and that Mr. Lynch made it clear what he meant by describing these figures?
Statistics can be open to misinterpretation in areas such as new industries of different character. Some have added value present and others have not. It is quite a complex area but I would be happy to deal with a specific question.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the rather startling turn-around which is supposed to have taken place with trade figures during the month of August? Exports are supposed to have——
That seems to be a separate question.
Is the name of all that is holy how can I not quote statistics?
The questions on the Order Paper are general questions and the Deputy is now introducing a specific item.
I am only proving that the figures are wrong by giving instances and that there is something seriously wrong with the trade figures published by the CSO.
In the Chair's opinion, that could lead to endless supplementary questions on various matters.
The question on the Order Paper is very specific and asks the Taoiseach if he is satisfied with the accuracy of the trade figures published by the CSO. I am now asking the Taoiseach if he is aware of the fact that the trade figures published by the CSO for August show a drop of £180 million in actual figures and show a complete turn-around of about £300 million in many cases and if he is aware of any explanation for this rather big turn-around in these statistics? Is he satisfied that these statistics are correct or do they throw some doubt on the series of figures published by the CSO for 1984?
The Deputy put down a question on the accuracy of production statistics and I would be happy to answer it. There are many reasons for variation in the figures both here and in other countries. This happens for a variety of reasons, some because of major transactions occurring normally in one month and because of large consignments coming in and out in a particular month. I am satisfied with our trade statistics and that data furnished by the CSO has been accurate in the past. With regard to the particular case, if Deputy Haughey puts down a specific question I will be happy to answer it.
There is no reason for me to put down a specific question. The figures are published by the CSO. Would the Taoiseach consider that the figures given by the CSO for increases in our exports in 1984 appear to be at variance with 1983? In January it was 39 per cent, in February it was 31 per cent, in March 46 per cent, in April 19 per cent, in May 50 per cent, in June 31 per cent, in July 22 per cent and in August 5 per cent.
The Deputy has quoted figures. The fact is that the oscillations in the figures from month to month are in accordance with the usual trend and the fluctuations tend to level out between different sectors. The oscillations to which the Leader of the Opposition referred are ones which have occurred throughout the whole history of the State in accordance with month to month trade statistics. If the Deputy had taken the opportunity to examine the figures in detail, he would be aware of that fact.
Would the Taoiseach accept that in regard to the White Paper on Industrial Development and a procession or series of oscillations which have been presented in the economic plan, there are serious doubts about the accuracy of the figures for industrial output, for export performance or the size of the labour force, and that the whole exercise should certainly be called into question? Would he not agree that there is a combination of instances, beginning with the famous £500 million black hole at the beginning of the year and continuing with the mistakes with regard to the milk production figures for the EEC milk super-levy and the rather peculiar pattern of our export statistics supposed to have taken place in the month of August? These show a clear discrepancy between the figures of the Industrial White Paper and the plan, as it is called, in the areas of figures with regard to the labour force. Is the Taoiseach aware that all these and many similar matters combine to cast serious doubt in this whole area and on the figures being put forward by the Government and that this leads one to regard the recent document published by the Government as a very dubious exercise, indeed?
I am aware, as the Deputy has now indicated by showing his hand, of the purpose which lies behind his question and the manner in which he is prepared to——
Answer the question.
No speech.
——cast doubt of one kind or another on the work of the Government and the Government plan and Industrial White Paper. A number of the points which he has made should be answered individually and I would be happy to do so another time, such as the closing speech in the debate.
As far as the milk figures are concerned, the Central Statistics Office furnished to the EEC provisional figures — marked provisional — in the normal way in respect of returns which they had received. The ordinary revision was carried out in the usual manner. The Deputy will not be able to fault the CSO with regard to the figures being marked provisional. I am open to answer in detail the other points in public time. The Deputy ought to consider where he stands in this matter. If he is seeking to undermine the credibility of the figures——
It is your figures. Answer for your own figures.
——provided by the Central Statistics Office, as the Deputy knows that office is run as a professional body and is not amenable to influence or pressure of any kind. Their directors have withstood attempts in the past to influence them and have threatened to resign because of political pressure. The Leader of the Opposition must know that his attempt to cast aspersions on them of this kind in unworthy of him and of his party and damaging to the national interest.
Might the Chair suggest that this debate would be more appropriate to item 7 of today's Order Paper?
The Taoiseach has just made a number of insinuations. In reply to his last point, could I ask him whether he has seen fit himself to establish a special committee or body to supervise the procedures of the CSO and whether that does not completely undermine his rather tendentious statement about the CSO? Further——
Would the Deputy like me to answer that?
——it is perfectly legitimate and correct for me to query various important statistics which have been put forward, particularly so when in recent times figures have been grossly mistaken. One might have been prepared to ignore one mistake but when there are a series of mistaken figures in key and crucial areas of the economy, it is very legitimate for me to comment on them, not so much in connection with the CSO but with the Government's acceptance of figures from different quarters to support the spurious document that they have just published?
In reply to the first point, the Statistics Council are a professional body who have consistently remained independent, which is of extreme importance.
But they are consistently being supervised.
They formulate and present statistical data on an independent basis.