Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I have been an advocate of a rolling register here. Regarding whether we could use PPS numbers, if there was a simple way of converting the 5 million plus PPS numbers, which are not sensitive to addresses, to a voting register, it would be done. However, there is no simple way of doing that without a massive change in the way we do our business. Returning to Deputy Gregory's point, PPS numbers would certainly be useful as a means of verification, but they are not the simple solution to creating the register. Allow me give a figure that illustrates this. In the period since 1 May 2004, some 295,171 people from the ten new EU member states have joined the workforce and got PPS numbers. PPS numbers are not sensitive to their address as they move around. Some lived for a while in County Kildare, but now they are in Wicklow and we all know this happens. It is not a question of being obdurate or difficult, but of dealing with reality and choosing the best way to do the job on this occasion.

I agree with Deputy Boyle and I am amazed there has not been a challenge previously on the basis of the inaccuracies of the register. Excellent work was done in The Sunday Tribune by Messrs O'Flynn and Coleman and if their figure of 800,000 inaccuracies was correct, it was a scandal. Even if the figure was my lower estimate of 400,000 plus, it was still a scandal. That is intolerable and that is the reason we are making the effort to amend the register through this Bill. I am grateful for the support of the House in extending the dates.

Deputies Gilmore and Catherine Murphy raised the issue of data protection. I regret the decision made on data protection and do not understand the logic of it. I do not understand how Deputies Crowe and Rabbitte were refused access to the register. They did not want the information for anything other than to assist democracy and they should have been facilitated. I am pleased to accept the amendment on that issue and have strengthened it.

Given we must issue the register by 15 February, it is not practical to postpone its issue until March or later. On 14 February, the existing register goes out of date and it would be wrong to allow a lacuna to build where we would have a day where we would not have a register other than the 2005 register. I will make it clear to local authorities that Deputies will have the right, up to the time of the electoral court and the time the county registers sign off on the register, and the opportunity to put forward their lists.

I have noticed, although it was not mentioned in the debate, there has been a disproportionate amount of deletions in some local authority housing estates. This is reprehensible because the specific guidelines sent to local authorities advised they should not lightly strike off electors living in council estates, particularly as they will accept rental from these same people the following week. I noted this myself and have sent out a circular advising local authorities to pay more attention to this matter.

To return to the point made by Deputy Catherine Murphy, when Members get the opportunity to see the registers, they will see superb field work was done in many areas and much trouble was taken. However, in some areas the field work may not have been so good. Where there is a disproportionate amount of deletions in a specific area, I have asked local authorities to pay particular attention.

See this speech in context