asked the Taoiseach the frequency with which the household survey, which has replaced the labour force survey, will be released by the Central Statistics Office; the publication date for the next set of statistics; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21130/98]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Household Survey.
The quarterly national household survey was introduced in September 1997, replacing the annual labour force survey. The purpose of the survey is to provide quarterly detailed statistics on the labour force and to produce periodic reports on social themes. Processing and publication of survey results are still at a developmental stage.
To date, one survey release has been issued by the CSO containing labour force details for the fourth quarter of 1997. The next release scheduled for publication at the end of the month will contain results for the first two quarters of 1998. The ultimate target is to produce quarterly reports within three months of the end of each quarter. The CSO expects to meet this objective during 1999.
Why has there been such an enormous slippage? The purpose of this exercise was to produce individual quarterly reports which would be published subsequently. There has been massive slippage when two sets of quarterly reports are to be released on the same day, six months after the first survey was taken. Has the Minister of State received an explanation for this from the CSO?
The labour force survey reports were running nine months to a year behind the taking of the surveys. The CSO is trying to ensure that, before the end of 1999, it will be able to produce quarterly reports within three months of the end of each quarter. It is making solid progress towards that objective.
It is not. Massive extra resources were allocated to the CSO by the last Government to enable it to produce reports on a quarterly basis. The value of the statistics rests on their freshness. Can the Minister of State explain why the CSO failed to publish separately the second set of quarterly statistics and why two sets of such statistics are being published simultaneously?
There is obviously an overlap. The quarterly national household survey was introduced in September 1997 and the CSO is trying to move towards producing that survey on a quarterly basis and away from the labour force survey methods. A huge changeover is taking place. At present, 150 CSO field staff are employed to carry out the quarterly survey. Three thousand homes throughout the country are visited each week by CSO interviewers.
Perhaps my question was unclear. I understood the Minister of State to say two quarterly reports will be published simultaneously. Is that correct?
I did not say that. To date one survey release has been issued by the CSO containing labour force details——
For last year.
——for the fourth quarter of 1997.
Correct.
The next release scheduled for publication at the end of this month will contain results for the first two quarters of 1998.
Therefore, I am correct.
Yes.
Why are they being published together? Why were the results for the first quarter of 1998 not published some months earlier as they should have been? That was the objective and the resources were made available. Does the Minister of State's brief not contain that information?
The only explanation I can offer is that the processing, analysis and publication of results is a complex matter. The new system is at a developmental stage and there has been an increase in the use of technology. The interviewers, for example, use laptop computers when conducting 3,000 interviews per week. The office is changing from an old system to a new one. That is the best explanation I can offer.
Does the Minister of State believe that explanation? If the CSO could publish the first quarterly set of statistics, how did it screw up on the second and third? Does the Minister of State believe that garbage?
The CSO informs me that there is a huge amount of work involved in changing from a system which it has used for decades to a new system of quarterly surveys. It involves additional work and resources. That is the reason for the delay.
I accept the Minister of State is not directly responsible as the CSO is an autonomous body. However, there is massive management failure which should be investigated. The CSO received a large sum of taxpayers' money to do the job it has failed to do.
I note the Deputy's comments and I will examine the matter further.