Jim Higgins
Ceist:5 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the number of persons living in the State whose husbands have emigrated for a period of more than three months; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Emigration Statistics.
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 type requested by the Deputy are not available.
Would the Minister of State agree that there is a substantial number of spouses whose husbands are compelled to work in England and the US and the fact that we do not know how many is a serious defect and indicates that our database is totally inadequate from the point of view of formulating social policy?
It is extremely difficult to extract the type of information the Deputy was referring to. Indeed, in the absence of such procedures the only reliable estimates are those from net emigration, the difference between inward and outward flows between successive censes of population.
Would the Minister of State not agree that it should be relatively easy to introduce some type of simple procedure whereby somebody intending to emigrate would notify some recognised official agency and on return again notify this agency so that we would be in a position to compile accurate statistics in relation to (a) the number of people who have emigrated and (b) the number of people who are here as dependants. The absence of that procedure is an acknowledgment on the part of the Government that they do not wish to know the facts in relation to emigration.
As I indicated on previous occasions, the whole format for the census is being looked at and I will certainly bear in mind the views of the Deputy.
Questions Nos. 2 and 3 related to the Summit that was held the week before last and, in the course of his reply the Taoiseach referred to the Summit to be held in June. I tabled two questions for answer by the Taoiseach today, one related to the letter from Chancellor Kohl and President Mitterrand about Lithuania, and I asked him if he had been consulted about it. The second question asked the Taoiseach whether it was the Government's intention to submit a paper to the Summit in June about political union. Both questions were transferred by the Taoiseach to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. It seems to me that they are essentially matters for the Taoiseach to answer because they relate to Government business and yet he had been transferred. I understand it is not the function of the Chair to transfer questions.
That is so.
I suggest that the Chair has a role to protect the interests of Members and to ensure that the Taoiseach answers questions that are properly his responsibility. It has not happened in this case.
The Chair has no function in the matter appertaining to the transfer of questions. That has been, and always has been, a matter for the Taoiseach and his Cabinet of the day.
The Taoiseach should not be allowed to duck his responsibilities to the House.
The Taoiseach is running away from well established practices.
I answered more questions than any other Taoiseach.
That is because there is an acquiescent Opposition.
It is because I am following precedent.
The Taoiseach is ducking questions.
I never duck questions.
The Taoiseach has ducked questions today.
We must proceed to Question No. 6.