Terpelaziun for the Minister of Public Records

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

S:reu:

The chart has been updated to reflect what I believe to be the current state of immigration, which is that someone else successfully migrated in the interim.  Unbelievably, the minister still seems unwilling to simply affirm the veracity of this depiction of the current public record.

However, I am going to take this as an official Government confirmation of the chart, since the minister seems to be implying that it is correct.  It seems like a simple "yes" would have saved us a lot of time!

I'd like to continue the line of questioning, but I'm limited to only one legally binding terpelaziun.  Ordinarily, I'd just continue the discussion and assume that the minister wouldn't insist on me making a new thread.  I'm not sure that I won't just get ignored again, though!

Nonetheless, let's try to get back on collegial terms.

So anyway, here's the chart again:

Now that we've officially established that the chart is accurate, it looks like we saw a sharp drop in the 51st Cosa, but by my calculations we only fell below replacement rate (or higher) in the 53rd Cosa, and this continued until the 56th Cosa.  Then things improved and stayed that way until just recently.

So I'm wondering what did the 53rd, 54th, 55th, 60th, and 61st Cosas have in common?

And so my next question would be whether or not the minister agrees that it's not as simple as partisan control, since we saw improvement in 57th Cosa?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

S:reu:

Just bumping this as a reminder...   Boy, I guess everyone has had to see this immigration rate chart a lot!  Sorry about that, folks.  Believe me, I'm not happy about having to ask this stuff over and over, either.

We were talking about what the 53rd, 54th, 55th, 56th, 60th, and 61st Cosas had in common.  They're all marked with diamonds on the chart.  They all seem unusually low periods of immigration, and so it seems like it might be a good idea to figure out what's going on there -- especially since we're right in the middle of another big slump!

And so my question was whether or not the minister agrees that it's not as simple as partisan control, since we saw improvement in 57th Cosa?

[Mic’haglh Autófil, O.Be]

And so my question was whether or not the minister agrees that it's not as simple as partisan control, since we saw improvement in 57th Cosa?

Estimat Tuischac'h:

I stated over three weeks ago now that partisan control appears to have little to do with immigration numbers. If the Member opposite had not been in such a rush to shout himself blue in the face, he might not have missed it.

• Partisan control also does little to explain the drops, since the Free Democrats were a member of the governing coalition from the 50th to 57th Cosas, which saw a downturn for a few terms before rebounding in the 57th (i.e. prior to the TNC taking control of the government).

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

S:reu:

I am grateful to the minister for his answer.  He is the government official in charge of the public record, and so his expertise is helpful.  So then, returning to the worst immigration periods: 53rd, 54th, 55th, 56th, 60th, and 61st.

These are marked with diamonds on the chart.

Clearly, we need to be asking what these periods have in common that set them apart from other terms, when we had much more success.  I am sure that the minister and Government at large must have already been asking themselves this question, looking for a pattern.

In our quest for causes, we've already rejected simple partisanship.  What factor or factors have the minister identified that's the same exclusively across those terms, otherwise?  What do they have in common to set them apart from other terms of governance?