Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, to the House. The significance of statistics in shaping public policy is often overlooked. Often when we think of statistical information, we think of the work of the Central Statistics Office. However, we generally only think of the Central Statistics Office when there is a census and forget about the important work it does between censuses. The Minister of State outlined the manner in which the office serves the State through the provision of economic and social information, which in turn informs public policy of Departments. This is very important. I acknowledge the work of the Central Statistics Office on the census this year. Its work ran parallel with the general election campaign and its officers were calling to people's doors at the same time as politicians.

Statistics comprise an intriguing area. Many university professors provide information on the manner in which public policy should be built on statistics. I agree with this in general but with reservations. Senator O'Keeffe referred to the manner in which the national cancer care strategy was built upon statistical information. The information suggested centres of excellence should be located in areas with a high population density. Perhaps the model is more suited to other countries than to Ireland. In England, for example, the cities are the centres of population. Manchester, Birmingham and London have huge populations and the policy of having centres of excellence works in them. However, in areas such as the north west of Ireland, in respect of which statistical information is only being taken from the Republic's side of the Border, one must include Donegal, Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Mayo before having a critical mass sufficient to justify a centre of excellence. Some of that area is being served by facilities in the east. There was a breakdown in the terms and the manner in which the centres of excellence were rolled out. This is now being addressed through the centre in Derry.

We must be careful about the manner in which public information is used to inform public policy. Issues such as rural population must be taken into account. Often, however, policy is not rural-proofed. This is done in other jurisdictions such that those living in rural, isolated areas are given consideration over people who live in urban areas where facilities and services are economically viable to the extent that they can be provided by the private sector in addition to the public sector. This should be taken into consideration in the formulation of public policy based on statistics, particularly in countries such as Ireland.

I read some of the Keane report. The information and recommendations in it were formed on the basis of statistical information on mortgage holders and the fact that there are 45,000 mortgage holders in arrears. While I am not advocating that the Keane report should be supported – it has many flaws – I believe it indicates a number of areas that may merit consideration by the Government. These include the circumstances of the almost 60,000 households with restructured loans and the 45,000 who have fallen into arrears of 18 months or more.

The report outlined that the Central Bank does not have access to mortgage holders' current income levels so it is impossible, therefore, to tell whether the 88% of people who are currently paying their mortgages could absorb further tax increases by the Government or interest rate increases by the ECB. It would be worth following up on that and identifying, through the ECB or by giving a role in this regard to the CSO, whether the people who are continuing to pay their mortgages would go into arrears if they were faced with tax increases, new levies or additional hikes to mortgage interest rates. It is important to obtain this information because we must try to ensure those who are paying their mortgages are supported and do not face additional costs or charges that would militate against their being able to continue to pay their mortgages.

With regard to pre-budget planning, in which every Department is engaged, the Fiscal Advisory Council outlined yesterday that to meet the deficit target for 2012 of 8.6%, there would be a need for an additional adjustment of the order of €400 million to the proposed cut in spending to €4 billion for next year. If this is required, it will be far in excess of and in stark contrast to the sum being sought by the troika. It recommends a reduction next year of €3.6 billion, yet the Central Bank and the Fiscal Advisory Council are now recommending, on the basis of the information available to them, that we should go further than that.

The Minister for Finance indicated yesterday that the statistical unit in his Department would consider all these suggestions and carry out its own analysis and make its determination based on the advice and information available to it. This shows the disparity in regard to information. While the European Union and IMF are saying Ireland is doing well and meeting all its targets which warrants a reduction of €3.6 billion next year, the new advisory council is saying we need to go further and should consider a reduction of €4.4 billion and an additional €1 billion each year thereafter until 2015. Both groups are using the same information but the manner in which they are deciphering it is leading to differences. We should not go further than a €3.6 billion adjustment next year because the people simply could not handle it. As the Minister of State is aware, people are struggling, at least in my constituency, and if we go further than what was proposed under the agreement with the troika, we will enter dangerous territory.