Census underestimated immigration - Conor Lenihan

DeGaulle

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
31
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
 


Twin Towers

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
5,803
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
We need another census.

And if the present director of the CSO makes another pigs ear of it, I hear Dominos pizza are recruiting.
 

Catalpa

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
10,257
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
Yet when Catalpa pointed out in advance of the Census that they would screw up and pointed it out again after they did he was called this that and the other.... :?

Reckon Conor checks out here occasionally - more accurate than the CSO anyway and cost free too! :D

Hopefully the CSO will be relaunched under New Management ASAP and makes a serious attempt to do the job right next time round...
 

Defeated Romanticist

Active member
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
277
Catalpa said:
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
Yet when Catalpa pointed out in advance of the Census that they would screw up and pointed it out again after they did he was called this that and the other.... :?

Reckon Conor checks out here occasionally - more accurate than the CSO anyway and cost free too! :D

Hopefully the CSO will be relaunched under New Management ASAP and makes a serious attempt to do the job right next time round...
This might explain why there were so many empty houses on census night as well.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
ibis said:
where is he getting his figures from?
Iskanders.


How about stastical sampling rather than a headcount, how would that stand up for accuracy in an irish context?
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
CookieMonster said:
ibis said:
where is he getting his figures from?
Iskanders.


How about stastical sampling rather than a headcount, how would that stand up for accuracy in an irish context?
Oh, we couldn't use that....it would never satisfy people, because it's the same methodology the Lancet used in Iraq!
 

Catalpa

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
10,257
ibis said:
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows

You are completely wrong!

The CSO is charged with assesing all people resident in the State on Census night - incl the immigrants.
 

freedomlover

Active member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
198
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
Its extremely unlikely to be out by that much. The Census figure is for April 2006, almost 18 months ago. Is Lenihan saying there were 160,000 to 200,000 Poles in Ireland at the time of the census or saying there is that number now? Even if the census figure is correct for April 2006, its within the realms of posibility that there is that number now, as they've been coming in large numbers since the census. However, its very unlikely there were 160,000 to 200,000 Poles here in April 2006. If there were, then that would mean about 300,000 Poles here now. Or 1 in 14 of the total population. I just don't think there are that many.
 

FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,980
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
I tend towards the view that the Census is more accurate with regard to the Poles than with regard to the Chinese and other non-EEA nationals on account of the largely-illegal status of the latter coming from non-Western countries and the consequent fear of deportation upon answering the "knock on the door".
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
ibis said:
CookieMonster said:
ibis said:
where is he getting his figures from?
Iskanders.


How about stastical sampling rather than a headcount, how would that stand up for accuracy in an irish context?
Oh, we couldn't use that....it would never satisfy people, because it's the same methodology the Lancet used in Iraq!
True, we'd probably end up with five million Chinese, three million poles and eight paddys.
 

harvey

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
34
ibis:
" The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. "

You really are pretty ignorant, aren't you? The census asks one simple question: who was in Ireland on a particular date. You could have jetted in here from Tierra del Fuego just to spend one dirty weekend in Temple bar, never more to return, but if you're in the country on the nite in question, you should be counted.
You really should make an attempt to know what you're talking about before offering us your inanities.
 

freedomlover

Active member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
198
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.
But, although unlikely, just suppose for the sake of argument that Lenihan is correct and that there are up to 140,000 more Poles here than thought. And assume similar pro rata under-estimates for Latvians, Lithuanians, Chinese, Africans etc. Since most immigrants work, it would mean that there are now perhaps 150,000 extra people in employment than previously thought and a correspondingly greater level of economic activity than previously thought - that would mean GDP increasing by 8% to 10% since 2004 rather than the 6% previously thought and employment incrasing by 6% to 7% since 2004 rather than the 4% previously thought. These rates of growth would match the peak of the Celtic Tiger in the late 90s. I'm not saying that's what happened, but its what would have happened IF (and its a big IF) Lenihan is correct about the under-estimation of Poles and other immigrants.
 

lostexpectation

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
13,988
Website
dublinstreams.blogspot.com
Catalpa said:
ibis said:
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows

You are completely wrong!

The CSO is charged with assesing all people resident in the State on Census night - incl the immigrants.
its not based on just the one day, and no census could accurately find out his info, give us an example of a census that does? how would you suggest they do it.

as said above it could only be done using samples, this wouldn't be a census.

i saw on skynews last night there are about 90,000 US citizens here, I guess you want them to feck off too?

you keep on bleating on about this, noone disagrees with your point about the innaccuracy of the census re immigration.
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
ibis said:
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
What do you mean by "short term". If the migration took place during the five years between each census, then yes, it wouldn't account for them?
 

Catalpa

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
10,257
lostexpectation said:
Catalpa said:
ibis said:
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows

You are completely wrong!

The CSO is charged with assesing all people resident in the State on Census night - incl the immigrants.
its not based on just the one day, and no census could accurately find out his info, give us an example of a census that does? how would you suggest they do it.

as said above it could only be done using samples, this wouldn't be a census.

i say on skynews last night there 90,000 US citizens here, I guess you want them to feck off too?

you keep on bleating on about this noone disagrees with your point about the innacury of the census re immigration.
its not based on just the one day

Its based on one night:

A Census of Population was taken on the night of Sunday, 23 April 2006...

http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/2006 ... Report.pdf
 

Conor

Moderator
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
5,149
freedomlover said:
Since most immigrants work, it would mean that there are now perhaps 150,000 extra people in employment than previously thought and a correspondingly greater level of economic activity than previously thought - that would mean GDP increasing by 8% to 10% since 2004 rather than the 6% previously thought and employment incrasing by 6% to 7% since 2004 rather than the 4% previously thought.
This would only be the case if GDP and employment estimates were derived (on a pro-rata basis) from the census demographic figures.
 

Odyessus

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
12,890
DeGaulle said:
Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said at a conference on Saturday that he believed that the 2006 census seriously underestimated the number of foreign nationals (IT, page 4). He suggested that the number of Poles in the country is 160,000 to 200,000 rather than the 62,495 report in the census.

If this is true, then who should take responsibility for the CSO's incompetence? Do we need another census?

Had the census been correct, we might have retained our 13 seats in the European Parliament. As things stand, the Dáil constituencies will be incorrect as they are based on overall population.


As I have pointed out before, the methodology of the census assumes that people will give full and accurate answers to the questions posed on the form. There are now a great many people in the state who have no interest in giving this, or even any information. I cannot see how another census conducted using the same methodology would be any more accurate.
 

storybud

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
35
The census relies on co-operation from the public on the night in question, this will never work as the illegals will do everything to thwart it -common sense really, look at America 10 million and counting,,

I can still never understand why anyone without a valid visa/passport gets into this Country unless it is via Belfast (anyone notice the amount of U.K. cars the African immigrants are driving)

If you asked any immigration department in Europe which Country should be the easiest to implement immigration policy I am sure Ireland would be near the top -

1) An Island with no connecting flights to Africa/India/Pakistan
2) A 90% plus indigeneous population with no history of immigration what so ever so no Ghettos to hide out in.
3) A small population so a sudden increase will be noticed sooner.
4) A first world Country with resources to govern properly -

So again it is shown what a usless shower are running the Country but the opposition in this case I fear would be even more useless.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
CookieMonster said:
ibis said:
Sigh. You guys really cannot grasp this, can you? The Census does not consider short-term immigration flows. It's a known fact, because the methodology was developed for mostly static populations. It's a measure of permanent or long-term residents, not transitory migrants. Nor, of course, would I consider Conor Lenihan a spectacularly reliable source - where is he getting his figures from?
What do you mean by "short term". If the migration took place during the five years between each census, then yes, it wouldn't account for them?
Sure. How would it be able to? If someone entered the country after one census, and left before the next, they're simply never going to appear on the census.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top