Unemployment is not a subject that is central to this blog, but each month the unemployment figures are monitored and it seems there is a demand for one blogpost to discuss the issues. This is it.
The Central Statistics Office publishes monthly statistics for unemployment, and yesterday it published the statistics for July 2012. There are an estimated 310,000 people unemployed in (the Republic of) Ireland today equating to 14.8% of the workforce. Every three months the CSO publishes more reliable estimates of unemployment in its so-called Quarterly National Household Survey. The last survey was published in June 2012 and related to the first three months of 2012 and showed 309,000 unemployed or an unemployment rate of 14.7%.
Unemployment versus the Live Register
There are different ways of measuring unemployment – remember people who have retired from the workforce, or otherwise aren’t available to work aren’t unemployed, nor are people in education and training. There are international standards for measuring unemployment and the 14.8% unemployment rate is the International Labour Organisation (ILO) measure. The 14.8% unemployment rate means there are approximately 310,000 people unemployed in the State. When you hear statistics from the UK, the US and most other countries, this is generally the number to which they are referring.
In Ireland, we also monitor total claimants for all unemployment-related benefits and this is what we call the Live Register. This is accurately monitored by the CSO based on the total of real claims at job centres around the country. Yesterday’s statistics showed that there are 460,323 on the Live Register. Because the number of claimants rises or falls during particular months every year, eg in July when universities are closed, the figures increase, in September when universities re-open they reduce, the CSO produce seasonally-adjusted Live Register statistics each month as well, and yesterday’s figures showed 437,600 on the Live Register on a seasonally adjusted basis.
Emigration and labour force participation
It is a matter of considerable shame that in a country historically scourged with forced emigration that we do not have any systems in place to monitor emigration.
Shame on you public administrators and the Central Statistics Office.
What we do have are quarterly surveys from the CSO which look at emigration trends in a sample of households, and every five years we have a census and because we accurately monitor births and deaths, net migration is a balancing figure in the census. But the latest census for 2011 showed that these quarterly surveys are woefully inadequate with Census 2011 showing the net inward migration for 2006-2011 was 231,269 whereas the quarterly surveys indicated it was 120,000 (five years of an average of 24,000).
A routine criticism of the unemployment statistics, particularly since the onset of the financial crisis in 2008 is that the figures are flattered by emigration, and were it not for forced emigration then we would have far more than 310,000 unemployed.
Anecdotally that criticism seems valid, in that we can see in our communities the disappearance of people we know or at least would recognise. GAA clubs complain that emigration of young men means they can’t field teams anymore, and our media has featured stories of emigration. But absent hard data from the CSO, it’s just anecdote.
Northern Ireland and the UK
The unemployment rate in the Republic of Ireland at the end of July 2012 was 14.8% equating to about 310,000 people. This rate compares with 6.9% in Northern Ireland and 8.1% in the UK overall.
The UK is our neighbouring jurisdiction and we share a great deal socially, culturally, economically and legally. Yes they have their own currency and a real central bank, and there are differences. But it is perfectly valid to compare unemployment rates in the two jurisdictions and if there are big differences, to ask why.
It is routinely pointed out that Northern Ireland is a special case because of the effect of state spending, particularly from Westminster and the fact that 31% of employment is in the public sector compared with 16% in the Republic. Though on the other hand, Northern Ireland shares the uniform UK corporate tax rate, so if Derry is competing with Letterkenny for Foreign Direct Investment and accompanying jobs, then Letterkenny with a 12.5% corporate tax rate has a head start on Derry with its 24% rate. It should be noted that the UK main corporate tax rate will drop to 23% in 2013, and there are ongoing talks of lowering the Northern Ireland rate to a level similar to the Republic’s but such a move would require Northern Ireland to reduce it dependence on Westminster funding under the EU Azores Principle.
Overall the UK is not in the healthiest of economic states with a deficit of 8%, more or less equal to our own. Their debt is about 80% of GDP whereas ours will shortly be 120%. Their economy is growing at a similarly anaemic level to our own.
So, with an unemployment rate of double our neighbouring jurisdiction, it seems valid to demand answers from leaders, particularly leaders who promised to place jobs at the centre of their attention.
Unemployment benefits
Firstly there is no suggestion here that the standard unemployment/job seekers assistance of €188 per week in this State is sufficient for anything other than the most basic of life’s needs, and sometimes not even those. In many jurisdictions, unemployment benefit is higher than ours following the loss of a job, though as far as I can see, our long term unemployment benefit is higher than most.
So, loaded words like “excessive”, “generous” or “Polish charity” don’t come into it.
But the fact remains that in our neighbouring jurisdiction, the UK, the standard weekly jobseekers allowance is GBP 56.25 (€70) for under 25s and GBP 71 (€90) for over 25s. Housing benefit is also payable in the UK, though in Ireland we have rent assistance payments. There are price differences between the two jurisdictions for consumer goods and services, and the UK is often cheaper. There are differences in the end-user cost of state services, with the UK often free for medical treatment for example.
Just as it is valid to challenge politicians on their policies and (in)actions, it is also valid to question if we can afford these levels of unemployment benefit and if so-called “activation measures” like training, mentoring with CVs, interviews, job clubs, starting businesses can help reduce the number of unemployed.
Is unemployment stabilising or reducing
The number of people unemployed stands at 310,000 today equating to 14.8%. This compares with 4.4% at the start of 2007, 14.1% in February 2011 at the time of the last General Election and at 14.8%, is today at its highest level since the crisis unfolded in 2008. At the start of 2005, unemployment stood at 95,800 people and was 300,000 at the start of 2011. So unemployment today of 310,000 and 14.8% is in fact still increasing by reference to the unemployment rate and the number unemployed.
The Live Register has stabilised and in fact declined slightly. The seasonally adjusted Live Register peaked in August 2010 at 449,400 and today stands at 437,300. For political fans, the seasonally adjusted Live Register has declined from 442,300 in February 2011 when we had the last General Election, to 437,300 today. However there are 7,629 extra people on training courses and community employment schemes today, compared with June 2011. Hard data on emigration is not available. So I think it is fair to say the Live Register is stabilising, though not appreciably reducing.
NAMA Wine Lake 
@NWL when one says “unemployment benefits” is that the “dole” does it not expire/end after a set period,then “social welfare” kicks in.
Are the comparisons to the UK for people receiving long term unemployment benefits or people between jobs.
In US “stamps” get deducted by employer,if you lose your job you get 26 weeks of unemployment benefits from the state,there has been a few federal extensions of benefits up to 99 weeks.Unemployment rate over here just over 8% in an election year,quite high.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/business/economy/extended-federal-unemployment-benefits-begin-to-wind-down.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57485076/ahead-of-the-bell-us-unemployment-benefits/
@John,
I believe the “dole” is commonly used to refer to recipients of what are technically called Jobseekers Allowance and Jobseekers Benefit. The difference between the two appears to be means testing but I believe the rates are the same.
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/unemployed_people/
I am not aware of any limit to Jobseekers Allowance, could be 40 years!
In the UK, all unemployed people are entitled to, I believe, six months of the payments shown above for the UK, after which the payment is means tested.
@NWL thanks for that just over my coffee this morning,reading about an unfortunate unemployed man,he claims to be receiving quite a lot less than the 188 a week.
“Simon is getting just €120 a week in social welfare.”
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/they-think-were-squandering-it-were-paying-bills-3188003.html
Apparently its not uncommon, due to means testing, after as much of a 12 month wait, to allocate as little as €1 to formerly self employed folk. The guy is probably on SWA while waiting for his means test to come through.
Interestingly, it does seem that by far much of the very worst poverty in the state appears to be happening to formerly self employed folk. Scary if you have heard the pressure put onto newly unemployed folk to “start your own business.”
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0727/1224320883314.html
Thought this article from Dan O’Brien was quite good last week for a framing fo the discussion on actually measuring unemployment in Ireland.
Basic point is that the Census figures (which measure unemployment based on your own opinion) may be proof that the QNHS survey is too lax in its definition of employed (apprently one hour a week will count you as employed in the QNHS according to the article).
From a policy perspective he argues it means we may have been underestimating unemployment even in the good times and hence failing to invest sufficiently (or appropriately – FAS) in training/upsklilling.
It should never be forgotten that there is a poverty industry. Much like the town with the Poor House was one that had wealth and trade when there was little or no movement of liquidity. Today the transfer to business via the unemployed is as effective as it ever was.
Think for a moment. How much do you thing is left over from €188. And do you believe for one moment that the Dept of Social (whatever it is this week) are handing over extra cash. They are in a pigs eye.
On the rent allowance, it is utterly ludicrous to include this into the notional receipts of those unemployed.
@vince
… dept of health are handing over extra cash… just show up, show your benefit card, tell them you want dosh for a new matress for your kid and it’s handed over – no receipt required etc etc.
part of me would love to live on 188 a week, just show up and collect; the other part of me prefers to live on less and make my own way… horses for courses.
A lot of people are ‘recent’ additions to the register (post celtic tiger shall we say), a fair few more retired at 16.
The dept of health are handing over nothing. All are with the DoS(ww). But no cash is handed to the unemployed person and never was. Nor is any cash handed to the tenant, that cheque is written to the landlord.
Further, suppose the employed person needed a bed. She would deal with the shopkeeper. She would rarely pay the ticket. Here though the State in it’s insistence that one Citizen is better than another allows the shopkeeper landlord to validate the unemployed. In that the State actively trusts the shopkeeper/landlord and still reduces the unemployed to that of potential criminal.
And no one lives on €188 a week. And a bunch of post-colonial gobshites makes certain that no surplus could be created either thereby keeping people in a state of semi terror.
Unemployment insurance lasts for:
UK = 6m
USA = 26weeks (6m), extended up to 99 weeks during this recession
Germany = 12m
Other EU countries = 12-24m typically
Irl = 9-12m, 188pw
After that, many countries offer social assistance.
Irl = means-tested JSA (i.e. dole) = 188pw, potentially forever
UK = dole, no limit to duration
Germany = 359pm + health ins + housing benefit
USA = nothing for single people, AFAIK
Vince,
I asked a pal last week is rent supp paid to him the tenant, or direct to the landlord, and he specifically told me that the DSP deal with him the tenant, pay him a cheque/draft, etc.
In his case, the DSP do not deal direct with the landlord.
Sorry Lambicman, I was somewhat in error. Yes, the CWO can make the payment to the tenant but only with the agreement of the landlord. And your friend can get the rent supplement if the landlord agrees.
I’ll agree to disagree. I know the DoH hands over cash.
@Lambicman it’s often suggested anacedotaly that there is a correlation between Irelands high unemployed rate and the “generous” benefits packages for those unemployed.It does appear a little generous to continue indefinitely with same package as those between jobs.Does it act as a disincentive to taking lower paid jobs,also apologies for too many questions but how does 188 stack up with the weekly minimum wage?
Weekly gross min wage is 40 * 8.65 = 346 euro.
On its own, the 188pw is not really a barrier to taking a low-wage job.
However, when the loss of rent supp is added, it reduces the incentive.
In particular, this applies to couples with children. Even the DSP admit that 2 adults with 2 children can be worse off in employment, when you include loss of CDA, rent supp and medical card.
However, this family type doesn’t account for a lot of un.
@Lambicman, at the risk of straying back into the fray that was the Professor Richard Tol “working paper” at the ESRI on the cost of working. You need adjust the min wage for any tax and levies. But you might also need adjust it for costs you would incur with work which you wouldn’t if you were unemployed. Ireland seemingly has the most expensive child care costs in Europe so if you work, you may need place your child in a creche or employ a minder. Our transport costs, particularly cars, are expensive. And when working, you tend to have other costs like take-away food, beverages and clothes/make-up/grooming. Professor Tol’s report is here
Click to access esri_report1.pdf
The jury is still out on what proportion of people would be better off on benefits – Prof Tol suggested up to 44% of families with children.
[UPDATE: 7th August, 2012. The Independent today carries a report on childcare costs which isn’t scientific but it supports Prof Tol’s findings – €1,100 amonth to mind one child and €2,000 for two children! http://www.independent.ie/national-news/childcare-costing-more-than-mortgage-bills-survey-finds-3190912.html%5D
Personally I wonder if benefits are such an attraction though. Just before the bust, we had 4.4% unemployment with fairly generous benefits which have since been whittled at. This suggests most people by a very large margin indeed will choose work over benefits. Since the crisis unfolded in 2008, some occupations have seen wages and perks cut dramatically and I wonder if, in some instances, it is more attractive to claim benefits, but I would be loathe to say that attitude was widespread.
Some countries pay more generous UI, yet have lower UNRs. While they are more generous with the payments, they are stricter and more active with re-education, re-training, sanctions, etc.
@Lambicman thanks for that clearly the minimum wage needs to be raised !
The spread narrows quite a bit after you factor in the deductions and costs associated with getting off your ass and working!
Travel,appropriate clothing,tools if necessary,that enfant terrible Richard Toll,had a paper on this.
http://richardtol.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/cost-of-working-in-ireland.html
Housing assistance is Section 8 in the US,Currently 1,300 a month in New York for a one bed,which confines you to basically a ghetto,long waiting list too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_(housing)
@Lambicman completely agree with you regarding retraining,this was shambolic,disgracefully,of course no one is accountable,nada zero no one fired slapped on the risk,ah sure it happens,it’s Ireland.Of course no bond repayments were missed or mismanaged.
“€35 million from EU Globalisation Fund to help nearly 6,000 construction workers in Ireland”
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/1151&type=HTML
“A SIGNIFICANT portion of a €35 million globalisation fund to retrain redundant workers may have to be returned to the EU because of mismanagement of the scheme, the Dáil has heard.”
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1027/1224306561890.html
@ NWL
“… but I would be loathe to say …”. Tut, tut – ‘loathe’ should be ‘loath’ as in “disinclined, reluctant, unwilling, etc.”.
I haven’t gone away you know!
@Bunbury, thanks and of course, you’re correct. Blame the lapse on spending so much time this week on Judge Finlay Geoghegan’s extensive mangling of the English language in her Treasury judicial review judgment.
@NWL..”.Since the crisis unfolded in 2008, some occupations have seen wages and perks cut dramatically”…really like for instance,bit anecdotal for you:)
Brendan Keenan,Indo. yesterday.
“Just as alarming as discouragement is the job losses among the 20-24 age group. Irish firms appear to have cut costs mainly by reducing jobs and hours worked rather than cutting wages. One can see that this is easier, and that it is easiest of all to get rid of junior staff, but it may do more long-term social and economic damage than asking those in work to take less pay.”
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/brendan-keenan/brendan-keenan-we-wont-have-qualified-workers-when-jobs-come-3187919.html
@John,
The overall hourly earnings of the entire workforce have held up during the 2008-2012 crisis with average hourly earnings actually increasing by about 3%. But there are sectors where hourly earnings have declined.
Click to access earnlabcosts_q12012.pdf
And those sectors themselves will have winners and losers and some declines will be greater than the average. So there’s you non-anecdotal evidence!
@NWL you seem to be getting it in all directoions these days,could not resist!
Thanks for that link,it’s probably one off the biggest problems facing the country,NAMA could play a much bigger role.Start with some small scale initiatives,for example link up with the NDRC,take equity in start ups instead of rent.Great PR,small scale yes,but positive.Problems or issues are that NAMA is a bit ginger about owning buildings,denialibility and all that!
There has to be suitable empty buildings,bring some life into a neglected area of the city,young start ups,coffee shops often follow,etc.
http://www.ndrc.ie/
@ NWL
Any theorys out there on the impact of our unemployment and particularly youth unemployment on the housing market? I think it’s fair to say that the banks are being picky regarding ‘secure’ employment these days when reviewing mortgages applications, something that’s not exactly in abundance for our young people, particularly considering the government have pulled down the shutters on the public service.
All things being equal, as youth unemployment is higher, shouldn’t we expect to see more of a drop in FTB style properties after say 3 years or so (around now) and maybe family homes 10 years from now? Or are the numbers not there to have such an impact?
Read the article with interest, but failed to see the point of the article other than being a snide attempt to attack social welfare rates in Ireland. Any reasonable analysis would be of the opinion that the article attempts to link high rates of unemployment in Ireland with a ‘generous welfare system’. However I would like to point out some facts that failed to make it into the article. Firstly, the main reasons for high unemployment are the collapse of the construction sector (maybe you can elaborate on how that happened in a next article), the collapse of the Irish and global economy (we know whose greed caused that) and finally a drastic cut in government expenditure has had a negative effect on the domestic economy.
Unfortunately I am of the opinion that most of the article seems to contain a particular likeness to right wing populist propaganda, that seeks to link high unemployment to ‘generous welfare’ and ‘workshy’ people who avail of it, but totally ignore the fact that welfare rates in Ireland are considerably lower than they were during the ‘boom’ when we had very low unemployment rates. That fact (which the article failed to mention) would lead me to the conclusion that the main reason we have high unemployment is because there are no jobs!!
Furthermore the writer seems to be in a state of contadictory overload as regard facts and analysis, firstly the writer makes what I would consider to be a robust argument on why is is NOT possible/feasible/wise to compare British and Irish welfare systems and then just goes against one’s own advice and does so!
Secondly the writer lambasts the Irish welfare base rate thus” Firstly there is no suggestion here that the standard unemployment/job seekers assistance of €188 per week in this State is sufficient for anything other than the most basic of life’s needs, and sometimes not even those. In many jurisdictions, unemployment benefit is higher than ours following the loss of a job, though as far as I can see, our long term unemployment benefit is higher than most.
So, loaded words like “excessive”, “generous” or “Polish charity” don’t come into it.” but then counteracts that statement by saying “it is also valid to question if we can afford these levels of unemployment benefit”
So is the writer saying that one can barely survive on the welfare rates here but ‘we’ can’t afford it, so ‘ye’ will have to suffer because ‘we’ want to cut welfare so that ‘ye’ can be forced to take up the imaginary jobs that are out there?
Finally the article headlines “Some harsh facts about unemployment in Ireland” but it failed to mention the harshest fact about unemployment in Ireland and that is that we have over 450,000 people (the majority through no fault of their own) who have no work and are suffering, and so are their famiies and children mainly because the greed of some has brought misery to many ! The last thing they need is some one having a swipe at them!
p.s I think my suggestion of there been ‘a right wing ideology’ inherent in the article, is boosted by the quality of comments it has attracted! (excluding my own and one or two others) !
A married couple are expected to survive on around €320 per week (€188 + €124 adult dependent) in Ireland. The rate for an adult claimant wouldn’t leave much change for Bertie Ahern’s cell-phone bill: http://bit.ly/MqgUnW
In truth Ireland’s hates its poor. During the ‘Celtic Tiger; era 15 people were dying each and every day due to health inequities: http://bit.ly/dUMuCh
There was no emergency meeting at Government Bldgs when this report was published – no Minister was woken from his sleep to tackle the problem. The EU, ECB, or IMF didn’t consult with the Government to formulate a plan so as to save lives. Indeed it could be said that the plan agreed between these parties was to increase the attrition rate. I suppose that is one way to tackle enforced poverty in Ireland: Make the poor die off at a faster rate! No doubt if a bus load of celebrities (say 15) were to crash land on Ireland it would garner more headlines that the deaths of 15 poor people every day.
And it’s insulting to compare welfare rates here with the UK – the UK doesn’t have a Health Service that allows such an attrition rate.
Jagdip, you “It is a matter of considerable shame that in a country historically scourged with forced emigration that we do not have any systems in place to monitor emigration.
Shame on you public administrators and the Central Statistics Office.”
I agree it’s a shame that the migration statistics are not very reliable but I’m not convinced there’s an immediately better solution.
The alternative to the household survey is to have a ports and airports survey but there’s no evidence that this would be any better. The gross flows are very large (around 30m) and only a small % of these are actual migration journeys, the rest is business and leisure travel. Very small errors in the gross estimates could lead to large errors in the net estimates.
There is also the border to NI, which under current policy is completely impossible to survey for the same purpose.
@Examiner,
Yes it is difficult to measure emigration in the way you describe for the reasons you describe, but if a 100% error was made in emigration estimates between 2006-2011, then that surely tells us that there is something awry with the present method of estimating emigration.
I have yet to hear an explanation from the CSO.
Are there sampling errors with the Quarterly National Household Survey, are bigger samples needed, are better samples needed. Can the accuracy of the survey be improved, perhaps with cross-referencing to other data like new PPS numbers, migration statistics from other countries, utility records.
Although we share a land border with Northern Ireland, most migration will be through our ports and airports, so might we introduce data capture there. As revealed on here, Ireland is unique for being a country with no obvious obstacle to having a growing population, yet being one of the only countries in the world where the population is less in 2012 compared with 1812.
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/the-departed-part-2/
I would be interested to hear what the CSO has to say on the matter.
Agreed. Some of the migration is to countries (eg UK and continental Europe) that are mainly tourist/business and family visits, not requiring visas so there is no adequate way to measure those. For Australia and NZ, much of the migration is short term visas of up to 2 years rather than permanent. And some people do leave and move between a number of different countries.
The only way I could see that you could do it is to measure activity against a PPS number over time and if there has been no activity for 2 years, then send a routine monitoring check to see are they still at the last known address. Hard to measure in realtime, but you could potentially retrospectively see when a person might have left the country.
Also, there would still be a proportion of people (eg stay-at-home mothers supported by partners, retirees from other countries, people with part time homes here but incomes elsewhere) who wouldn’t have interactions with the state in terms of welfare or tax, but would technically be resident here.
It should be possible to to obtain statistics from the various embassies for those that apply for working or investment visas as opposed to holiday visas. This would give figures for those moving to outside the EU. Others should be capable of being picked up from the Revenue and Social Welfare records.. not perfect, but sufficient to give broad figures.
In fairness unemployment benefits are only a part of the entire social welfare spending program.
There is also the old age pension and other benefits. (Open to correction) I believe the OAP accounts for about 20 to 25% of total spending, as the population ages this spending will have to rise as well.
The troika are of course looking at the entire spending program, and the pressure is on to reduce spending somewhere, somehow.
In the long term it may be beneficial to take unemployed workers, use them to improve the standards of OAP homes, i.e. solar water heaters, rain fall from the roof capture systems, proper insulation etc rather than continue to give out free allowances for electricity and winter fuel to the OAP resident. In other words, spend money to save money etc.
There would be spin off effects i.e. reduction in mains water usage, easing of pressure on Co Council water supplies etc
This could be done through local community schemes.
This I believe would give rise to greater social cohesion that Ms Burton raves about.
It does not make sense to pay skilled people to do nothing, whilst at the same time having lots of work required to be done which could in the long term reduce the social welfare spending bill.
The jobs market has improved slightly this year, however, unemployed people, in particular long-termed i.e over one year have no chance as employers openly discriminate against us. Our work history is only considered when it suits employers for example, at the end of activation, sorry retraining courses, when they want to pick and choose interns. We are not viewed as highly skilled professionals either by employers or the state, regardless of qualifications and work experience. Quite the opposite is the case. They clearly breach our rights and ignore their own rules causing huge stress and anxiety to the
unemployed person.
In Slovenia, unemployment benefits are cut after 3 months, yet their figures stand at 14.7% (Pop 2.2 m) and what about Spain where benefits are cut after 6 months, yet they have the highest unemployment in the EU. In Germany, has extremely dodgy system whereby contract workers are paid 1E/hr by private companies. The rest of their wage is supplied by the state. Those people are doing exactly the same work as salaried colleagues and are suppose to get the same opportunity, eventually. There have been a lot of complaints and strikes in Germany over this. At the same time, unemployed people have access to professional advice to help them find work. They are treated with respect and dignity by their DSP. Furthermore their rent allowance is allocated by square metre so if someone rents a smaller flat, the full allowance still qualifies. Here rent allowance is cut back at everyone opportunity. Poplar to contrary belief, landlords have to register with a huge fee to the PRTB (another useless and wasteful quango) and pay tax.
In Poland the average income for private sector workers is 350E/month, the Polish state still tells people which sector they will work in and only the families of higher professionals get to work in those sectors (medicine, law etc). For example a qualified nurse is paid 400E/month whilst a chaplain in a hospital gets 1K/month. I have Polish friends and they nearly start to cry when they tell me about their lives at home.
Politicians are paid between 38k-42k/year in Slovenia, Slovakia and Poland.
Umm, the PRTB of 75 over 4 years is a ‘huge fee?’
Then again, a previous slumlord did refuse to register unless I paid it.
Actually it’s to register all new tenants.