A report from the National Economic & Social Council has acknowledged that “migration can only ever be a complement to, but cannot substitute for, domestic fertility or workforce participation strategies”.
Much of the news reporting around NESC’s findings yesterday seemed to have conveniently missed that conclusion. One supposes it may have already been difficult enough for Ireland’s mostly liberal journalists to acknowledge that the state needs to help families welcome more children without also admitting that the establishment’s favourite solution – importing a workforce – wasn’t what the experts advised as a complete substitution for our collapsed birth rate.
As I have written here many times, and will continue to do so, the state has presided over a situation in Ireland for decades where what can only be described as anti-family measures were introduced, and the needs of the most fundamental and important unit in society were ignored.
That has now left, according to NESC, and to anyone who has been following the data, in a pretty dire situation, where “birth rates are falling, the number of children is declining, and each year the population ages. Within a decade, the ratio of workers to non-workers will narrow, and the population is projected to contract by the 2050s.”
The looming consequences of collapsed fertility have been widely recognised in the Western world, because of the inevitable and dire outcomes likely for economic growth, for the shrinking number of workers, for our ability to pay pensions, for healthcare, and for stability. The response of successive Irish governments has been to resolutely ignore the problem and to refuse to consider even basic measures to assist families such as raising child benefit which has not been increased in an almost-incredible 14 years despite the cost of living crisis, as if children live on fresh air instead of eating you out of house and home and costing a small fortune to clothe and feed.
NESC says that “without timely, coordinated action, these trends will place increasing pressure on public finances, social protection and essential services, reshaping Ireland’s economy, society and environment.”
As the report points out: as of 2024, Ireland’s fertility rate (the average number of children a woman would have in her lifetime if she experienced current age-specific birth rates throughout her reproductive years) was approximately 1.5, down from 2.0 in 2012. “This represents a decline of 25 per cent in the total fertility rate in just over 12 years”. It also represents a society where marriage has been devalued, where housing is unaffordable to ordinary people, and where young people are emigrating in droves – not to mention the elephant in the room, our spiralling abortion rate, reaching almost an appalling 11,000 lives ended in 2024.
Yet, just last month, when Ben Scallan of this parish asked then-Minister for Finance Pascal Donohoe and the Chief Economist John McCarthy what measures they were considering to tackle the collapse in births, they were dismissive of what they called “pro-natalist” policies and rubbished the efforts of countries such as Hungary which were described as having no effect (not the case).
Donohoe has since skipped off to the World Bank and the NESC report points out that Irish fertility rates “have fallen faster than expected” and that we could face a vicious cycle in relation to our birth rate where “fertility declines further, emigration rises, and the population continues to age.”
“Fiscal and pension pressures mount, constraining future investment and creating a downward spiral of stagnation, as well as intergenerational and regional unfairness. Once established, such dynamics can be very difficult to reverse,” the report warns.
NESC say that an alternative may be possible: a “virtuous cycle” where emigration is reduced, migrants are retained and natural population growth is supported – bringing about strengthened “intergenerational balance and fiscal sustainability”.
“Finally, while it has not formed part of the Council’s work on demography, there is a case for further assessment of demographic trends and projections on an all-island basis. Such an approach would capture cross-border dynamics and provide a stronger foundation for forecasting, resource allocation and long-term planning in areas such as health, housing, infrastructure and the economy,” the NESC report says – which would seem to contradict Pascal Donohoe’s claim that all such demographic matters had been dealt with in the Ireland Future Forty report.
The report also notes that in Ireland “demographic change is marked by substantial regional variation” with population growth and ageing unfolding unevenly across the country.
“Population growth in Ireland is unevenly distributed, and the settlement patterns of migrants are reinforcing this imbalance. Against a backdrop of overall Irish population increases, some regions – particularly rural and remote areas – are experiencing both depopulation and rapid ageing. These trends risk deepening inequalities, as shrinking, older populations may become increasingly vulnerable to the decline of essential services such as healthcare, education and transport,” it notes.
“Conversely, other areas are seeing higher concentrations of births, migrants and returning Irish nationals, bringing vitality and diversity. But this growth is geographically concentrated. This puts pressure on services and infrastructure, which also risks deepening inequalities as populations find it hard to access services or to get reasonable housing. Limited movement of people between counties means that the benefits of demographic dynamism are not spreading across the country. Thus, both depopulation and over-concentration can produce forms of inequality – one through scarcity of services, the other through excessive demand,” the report adds.
So what does NESC recommend? Some measures will be politically difficult and unpopular with the public such as raising the pension age. There’s a nod to bringing Irish emigrants home which would be welcome. And there’s the usual short-sighted reliance on commercial childcare despite the fact that this reliance – accompanied by millions of taxpayer euro of investment – has occurred in a period where the birth rate dropped further.
“Key policy measures include expanding and subsidising access to affordable, high-quality childcare, reforming the tax system to avoid penalising second earners, and offering more generous parental leave. Recent initiatives over the last decade – such as the extension of the Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) scheme alongside increases in maternity, paternity and parental leave, the New Baby Grant, and the extension of free GP visits – represent steps in this direction as they help to ease the financial pressures of raising children.”
Yet the same report stated that in that same period – in the last twelve years – the fertility rate fell by 25%. Maybe NESC could try asking women and families what they would prefer, because most surveys show that most mothers want to be at home with children when they are small, and the awful grind of putting a baby in crèche at 7.30 and collecting your child 10 hours later after a full day in the office and the commute is not a pro-parenting approach.
NESC – and the government – might have a chat to the Hungarians or others who’ve actually introduced measures to help families have children. But at this point, it is a step in the right direction to have a report which admits the obvious, that migration can’t substitute for measures that help to grow our own population.