10% of Republic’s population now made up of non-Irish nationals
The principle demographic results from the 2006 census are out and show that Irish Republic now has a population of 4.24 million, 10% of which is made up by non-Irish nationals. In fact, 612,000 were born outside of the Republic with 438,000 coming from the EU. Could be interesting to see if this develops into an election issue.The main places of origin are:
Northern Ireland 50,172
England and Wales 204,746
Scotland 16,863
Czech Republic 5,278
Estonia 2,373
France 9,307
Germany 11,797
Hungary 3,328
Italy 5,811
Latvia 13,999
Lithuania 24,808
Netherlands 4,292
Poland 63,090
Slovakia 8,201
Spain 6,207
Other European Countries 27,517
Romania 8,566
Russia 4,568
Ukraine 3,397
Moldova 2,260
Other 8,726
Africa total 42,764
Nigeria 16,677
South Africa 7,727
Zimbabwe 2,281
Congo 2,037
Other 14,042
Asia total 55,628
China 11,218
Philippines 9,644
India 9,342
Pakistan 5,850
Malaysia 3,409
USA 25,181
Brazil 4,720
Canada 4,618
Australia 6,624
New Zealand 2,393
Other interesting trends:
- Number of divorced persons has increased by 70 per cent, from 35,000 to 59,500 between 2002 and 2006
- The proportion of ever-married persons who were either separated or divorced increased from 7.5 per cent in 2002 to 8.7 per cent in 2006
- Number of Muslims up 13,400 since 2002 to just over 32,500
- 3.68 million Roman Catholic but the % share fell from 88.4 per cent in 2002 to 86.8 per cent in 2006
- 15% of all residences were vacant on census night
- Just 199 Polish pensioners
In The Netherlands after September 11th a Dutch TV crew was shocked by how much some immigrants hated Dutch society. Initially this was put down to the interviews taking place in Rotterdam and they thought that they would get a better reaction in Amsterdam.
This yielded the same result.
German American ,
‘Just under 12 per cent of the US population was born outside the US (33 million people in total). ‘
That may be a census figure but there are also 10 million or so ‘illegal immigrants who may /may not be included in that figure .
It’s also a statistical fact that the children of immigrants form a higher percentage of the USA’s younger population than the US born . This ‘phenomenon’ is also replicated in all western countries which have imigrant populations . The reasons for this are due to the social mores /customs etc extant in the immigrants country of origin .
“Just under 12 per cent of the US population was born outside the US (33 million people in total)”
Yeah, but 96.3% of the US population are descended from people born outside the (present-day)US within the relatively recent past.
People immigrate en masse – countries, cultures and languages change beyond recognition – get over it, white folks. (anyway, it’s not like Ireland has some kind of a distinctive culture that needs protection)
Greenflag: “That may be a census figure but there are also 10 million or so ‘illegal’ immigrants who may /may not be included in that figure.”
According to the Center for Immigration Studies, the US Census figure of approximately 33 million foreign-born US residents includes approximately 8-9 million illegal immigrants. Other estimates go as high as 20 million. If we assume the highest quoted figure then the total foreign-born population in the US would be about 44-45 million out of a population of around 3000 million (at the time these surveys were done), or approximately 15 per cent.
The above numbers are a bit inexact because of the differing times the estimates were made. However I think it’s fair to say that the US foreign-born population is likely in the range of 10-15 per cent, and definitely doesn’t exceed 20 per cent. If you added in US-born children of foreign-born residents then the figure for recent immigrants and their children would obviously be higher, but I don’t have time to look up the data on that right now.
Note that the US government publication “The Foreign-Born Population in the United States, March 2000” has lots of nifty statistics from the 2000 US census.
The figures on Chinese (11,000) are almost certainly a drastic underestimate by as much as 10-1. Most Chinese are here illegally – having come to the country on student-visas, before disappearing into the black-economy. They are required to register with the authorities but hardly any actually do so. The fact that around 1/3rd of dwellings were supposedly ‘unoccupied’ i.e. noone answered the door to the census-enumators speaks volumes – doubtless many were in fact inhabited by illegal-immigrants who have outstayed student-visas.
On the Polish thing it is generally believed in our media that far more are in fact here. However they have less reason to hide from the authorities as they are perfectly legally entitled to live here as EU citizens. So 63,000 is probably closer to the truth – suggesting most went back to Poland. But even so, the fact that our population of non-nationals has nearly doubled in the 4 yrs since the last census raises disturbing questions as to the sustainability of such a massive-influx – especially – in the week when the Galway water-crisis became big news – in the context of the inevitable strains immigration imposes on social-infrastructure. I think it’s high time this issue – together with Irish Ferries’type issues of exploitation and displacement of labour – moved to the top of political-debate here in the South. A Green candidate in Dublin (I think Dublin West) has now admitted on his blog that immigration is coming up on the doorsteps and that is welcome – even if the patronising tone from the leftwing parties on it is unwelcome.
German-American ,
Thanks for the info and the site .
The fact that around 1/3rd of dwellings were supposedly ‘unoccupied’ i.e. noone answered the door to the census-enumators speaks volumes – doubtless many were in fact inhabited by illegal-immigrants who have outstayed student-visas.
or by “native” Irish who didn’t want to be disturbed when Eastenders was on. Or who were frightened it was the taxman/bailiffs/a boring friend. Or, who were simply not at home.
But even so, the fact that our population of non-nationals has nearly doubled in the 4 yrs since the last census raises disturbing questions as to the sustainability of such a massive-influx – especially – in the week when the Galway water-crisis became big news – in the context of the inevitable strains immigration imposes on social-infrastructure.
As a matter of interest, what’s the latest unemployment rate, GDP per capita figure; how do they compare to, say 1987, before all these *non-nationals* decided to impose their strain on your social infra-structure?
Does anyone else think it’s significant that people from the North are counted as non-nationals? Surely there should be howls of outrage from northern nationalists? Or have I missed some in my quick race through this blog.
As for integrating people, every person living in the state should be treated the same as every other one. And while people should be welcome to keep up their linguistic, cultural and religious traditions, all should be taught the same, and should learn the first and second languages of the state. The French idea of all as citizens in the Republic is the correct one, even if its application there leaves a lot to be desired.
I am not sure what all the fuss is about on this therad from Harry Flashman and Dubliner etc.
The vast majority on this list are from the rest of the British Isles who have been flowing around these islands for genrations – infact many are probably only coming home.
The rest are also mostly other Europeans from within the EU and if you want free movement of capital & goods etc then you have to accept free movement of Labour.
As for the 100,000 Africans and Asians the former will probably advance the ROI soccer team in a couple of generations and the latter will raise the intellectual gene pool.
ie these figures are very encouraging.
They do look low though for Poles etc.
However they do show that a Gaelic and Culturally Catholic ethos should not possess the “soul” of the Irish State.
John, the influx of immigrants is a mix of EU and non-EU nationals, and a mix of workers and asylum seekers. 34% of those who entered the country during 2000-2003, for example, were non-EU asylum seekers. Ireland does have control over both categories, but has less control over the former than the latter.
It is interesting to note that only 39 people applied for in asylum 1992, a period when Ireland had negative net migration and an underperforming economy, as opposed to 7,724 who applied for asylum a mere seven years later in 1999, when Ireland’s Celtic Tiger began to gain international attention. Now, a cynic might claim that such a huge jump from 39 asylum seekers in one year (1992) to a thousand plus per month today indicates that people are not choosing the first refuge (as one does in an alleged crisis) but as choosing the most comfortable one – that, in essence, they are freeloaders masquerading as asylum seekers. We cannot be expected to accept an influx of people who are a burden upon the state. Here, rightly, we need to tighten up controls.
We do have controls over EU non-Irish nationals in that they are not allowed to stay here for more than three months unless they look for work and are not entitled to unemployment benefits for two years. We can also choose to issue work permits and set quotas for new member states such as those 10 countries from the Eastern Bloc (former communist). Unfortunately, in contrast to the labour immigration programs of other European countries, we are far too liberal in that we do not regulate by quotas to exclude low-skilled workers from entry. This absence of a ‘skills-based’ policy is a fatal flaw as low-skilled workers are the most vulnerable to economic downturn; and consequently, the most likely to become a burden upon the state. In contrast, skilled labour is highly mobile – and will simply exit the state when it is no longer needed. Employers Federations are in favour on the low-skilled as they are naturally in favour of paying lower wages and the increased pool of low-paid workers. But while employers benefit during the upturn, the state loses during the downturn when these low paid workers can’t find work and become a burden upon the state. Ergo, cast a sceptical eye upon the myopic perspectives and vested interests of such federations.
“Does anyone else think it’s significant that people from the North are counted as non-nationals? Surely there should be howls of outrage from northern nationalists?†– Galbaldy
Well, to some of us, Belfast will always be Ireland’s second city, even if PSF helped negotiate the removal of Articles 2 & 3 which laid claim to it and consolidated the position of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom by accepting its legitimacy, serving in Her Majesty’s administration as her loyal servants and using “Northern Ireland†in the official seals of office and ministerial letterheads instead of references such as “the six counties/the statelet/the north/etc†that they use while on the campaign trail.
What are the NI figures like?
Dubliner,
“Now, a cynic might claim that such a huge jump from 39 asylum seekers in one year (1992) to a thousand plus per month today indicates that people are not choosing the first refuge (as one does in an alleged crisis) but as choosing the most comfortable one – that, in essence, they are freeloaders masquerading as asylum seekers.”
Or else you could look at the figures in detail and see that you are way out with your thousand a month, it’s a third of that.
Also, if you looked at the figures for the EU between 2001 and 2005, you would see that nearly 2 million people claimed asylum, with just 2% of the figure applying in Ireland.
That makes Ireland the 13th most popular destination in the EU, less popular than the Czech Republic and just ahead of Poland.
The figure in 2005 dropped to 1.64%
Which goes to show that cynics, like virtually everyone else, are usually wrong when it comes to asylum seekers.