Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 17 May 1960

Vol. 181 No. 10

Committee on Finance. - Vote 49—Posts and Telegraphs.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £6,424,000 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1961, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (45 & 46 Vict., c. 74; 8 Edw. 7, c. 48; 1 & 2 Geo. 5, c. 26; the Telegraph Acts, 1863 to 1953; No. 45 of 1926; No. 14 of 1940 (secs. 30 and 31); No. 14 of 1942 (sec. 23); No. 17 of 1951; etc.), and of certain other Services administered by that Office.

The net Estimate amounts to £10,114,000, being a gross total of £10,780,592, less Appropriations-in-Aid of £666,592. The net provision represents an increase of £401,300 on the comparative total shown for 1959/60, but the increase of revenue we expect is enough to offset the increase in expenditure.

On a commercial account basis, it is expected that we shall maintain roughly the same position as during the last few years when Post Office operations showed a profit, though a relatively modest one. However, I shall deal with the general financial aspect in more detail later on.

Deputies may already have noted that the amounts we are now dealing with do not include any of the sums to be voted for the new Radio Éireann and that the comparative figures for 1959-60 do not include the Supplementary Estimate for £10 taken in March to cover the expenses of the Television Advisory Committee. I must, however, mention that, owing to a change in procedure subsequently decided on, we shall not now realise the item of £75,000 in our appropriations-in-aid shown as expenses recovered from broadcasting licence fees. It was not possible to have this change carried into the Estimates volume owing to the advanced stage which had then been reached in the printing. Another late change in Appendix C (No. 48), which could not be effected for the same reason, involves a reduction to £182,200 in the figure for services rendered to the Department of Transport and Power.

Finally, the figure of £9.4 millions for postal, telegraph and telephone revenue quoted at the end of Part II of the Estimate naturally does not include any of the extra revenue we shall earn from the increases made recently in postal and telegraph charges.

There, is however, no extra complication in making a straight comparison between the various subhead provisions this year and last year because adjustments have already been made in the 1959-60 figures to cover the amounts transferred from the Vote for Remuneration and the Vote for Increases in Pensions, totalling £136,700. It is to be remembered, though, that so far as the staff subheads are concerned, the increased pay and pensions operated only for 3½ months of 1959-60, while they have been provided for 12 months of the current year.

Subject to these general observations, I may now comment briefly on the various subheads where there is a variation of £10,000 or more.

Subhead A.1 relates to Headquarters Offices. Half the increase of £59,000 is due to the increased rates of pay. Most of the remainder is for increased overtime in connection with the proposed change over to a mechanised system in the Savings Bank which should not be repeated in subsequent years.

Subhead A.2 provides for Metropolitan Offices and Subhead A.3 for Provincial Offices. The major part of the increase of £103,800 and £227,300 respectively is ascribable to the increased Civil Service pay. In addition, there is provision for higher remuneration for sub-postmasters and an extra pay day in the year for staff who are paid on Fridays.

Subhead H.2 covers Losses by Default, Accident, etc. The extra £11,200 is required to meet known cases of Savings Bank, etc. losses.

Subhead I.1, deals with Salaries, Wages and Allowances (Engineering). The net increase here is at the comparatively small figure of £35,300 but this is because the cost of the extra staff taken on for the expansion of the telephone system is offset by an increased relief from Telephone Capital Funds.

Subhead K. has reference to Engineering Materials. The extra £36,700 is explained by the growth of the Telephone system and is due specifically to increased purchases of Engineering Stores and Motor Transport.

In regard to subhead M., Telephone Capital Repayments, the development of the Telephone System is financed by issues from the Central Fund which are repaid by annuities extending over periods not exceeding 25 years. This subhead contains full provision for the annuity payments to be made during the year. The increase from year to year—the present figure is £100,791 more than in 1959/60—is a natural consequence of the growth in the telephone system, a growth which in its turn leads to increased revenue.

Subhead N.1. relates to Superannuation Allowances etc. Increases under all heads, but principally in pensions and in additional allowances following on an increased number of normal course retirements, make up the increase of £35,900.

Subhead 0.2. refers to Civil Aviation and Meteorological Wireless, provision and installation of equipment, etc. This subhead varies very considerably from year to year and the decrease, as compared with last year, merely indicates a less costly programme of new works.

Subhead T covers Appropriations-in-Aid. Apart from the item of £75,000 for wireless licence expenses to which I have referred already, the main changes here which contribute to the total increase of £109,191 are an increase of £42,100 in receipts from Savings Bank Funds for services given by the Department and a decrease of £13,000 in receipts from the sale of non-engineering stores.

In comparison with the previous year, letters posted increased by approximately 6 million or 2 per cent. and the traffic during the Christmas period 1959 was the highest ever. There was a small, but welcome, increase in parcel traffic.

Some problems of mail operation were caused by the petrol crisis of November and the disruption of Aer Lingus services in March this year but they were overcome with little or no interference with normal services. The closing of the railway system which served South and West Donegal has led us to review mail distribution arrangements in that area. The matter is complex but substantial progress has been made and it is hoped, within the next few months, to introduce there a much improved distribution network with consequential benefit to the public.

Completion of the national scheme of reorganisation, begun in 1948, aimed at giving a better all-round standard of postal services in the provinces and a 6-day frequency of delivery on all mainland posts, is now in sight. The services in the Head Office district of Westport were reorganised within the past year and the new organisation for Portlaoise, the last remaining district, will come into operation on the 23rd May. Under this country-wide scheme, the standard 6-day postal delivery has already been extended to 1,084 posts and the final figure will exceed 1,100 when the Portlaoise area is added. In effect, about 100,000 households to which delivery was formerly given on 3, 4 or 5 days only a week have, over the last twelve years, been given the benefit of a 6-day delivery.

The steady growth of Dublin City and suburbs has made the sorting of mail for delivery there increasingly complex and difficult for our staffs to perform accurately from memory. The number of streets, roads, etc., served by the Dublin and District delivery postmen now exceeds 3,500. In order, therefore, to simplify the sorting processes and reduce the risk of error at an important stage of the handling sequence, an appeal will shortly be made to the public to adopt a new postal address numbering scheme—a zone numbering scheme is another way of describing it—for Dublin City and suburbs. The scheme will be quite simple from the public's point of view, it will merely involve their adding the appropriate zone number after the word "Dublin"—for example, "Dublin 2" in the case of Leinster House, Kildare Street. Similar, or more detailed, numbering schemes for much smaller urban areas than Dublin are operating with conspicuous success in other countries and I have no reason for thinking that the public here will prove to be any less co-operative. Full details of the scheme will be announced later.

On the foreign postal side the new Small Packet service, by which goods not exceeding 2 lb. can be sent by letter post, got off to an encouraging start. Postings are already of the order of 375,000 a year, mostly to the U.S.A. and Canada. The air parcel post service was further extended during the year and parcels may now be sent by that means to all countries which accept air parcels, in effect to most destinations in the world.

A special postage stamp was issued in July last to commemorate the first Arthur Guinness. As already announced, a special stamp will shortly be issued on the theme of the World Refugee Year and a further special issue later this year will commemorate the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunication Administrations, of which Ireland is a founder-member.

Public telegraph traffic continues to decline. About 1,800,000 telegrams were dealt with during the year ended the 31st March last, which was about 4% below the level for the previous year. Foreign telegrams were actually a few thousand more and exceptionally there was a marginal rise in, radio telegrams due to an increased number of gale warnings but these together were insufficient to offset the much bigger fall in internal telegrams and in telegrams exchanged with Great Britain.

As in the last few years, the one bright spot in the telegraph field is the Telex service which is continuing to grow rapidly. Last year I reported that the number of subscribers had increased from 63 in the previous year to 85. The latest figure is 116 and the number of recorded messages during the year ended 31st December, 1959, was 152,000 as compared with 95,000 for the previous year. In view of this increasing demand we are now drawing up plans to convert the whole Telex service to automatic working. This will mean that Telex subscribers here will be able themselves to dial directly to Telex subscribers in Britain and on the Continent.

The reorganisation of telegraph transmission on the basis of teleprinter and telephone working has now been completed. The position is being examined anew to see what further improvements in organisation may be possible but it seems unlikely that any substantial economies can be effected.

The increase in charges which was recently put into effect applies to internal telegrams only and is designed merely to offset the higher costs resulting from the Civil Service pay award and to prevent the telegraph loss from rising again. For 1958/9 which is the latest year for which actual figures are available that loss was £140,144; for 1959/60 the estimated loss is £125,800.

In 1959, there were 117 million local calls and 15 million trunk calls. The corresponding figures for 1958 were 104 million local calls and 15½ million trunk calls. The reduction in the number of trunk calls is more apparent than real as under the new group charging system introduced on 1st August last, many calls which would previously have been charged at trunk rates were treated as local calls. The only comparison possible is, therefore, as between the total number of trunk and local calls which shows an increase of ten per cent. as compared with the previous year.

A record number of 11,600 subscriber exchange lines was installed in 1959, being over 1,000 more than in 1958. Some 10,000 miles of trunk circuits were added to the trunk system; 16 exchanges were converted to automatic working; and 129 exchanges were extended and/or modernised during the year. Fifty-four new telephone kiosks were erected.

Although the number of exchange lines installed in 1959 was a record, it was exceeded by the number of applications during the year. A record total of 13,200 applications were received, some 2,700 more than in 1958. As a result, the waiting applicant list increased; excluding telephones in course of installation, the figure on 1st January, 1960, was 2,700, compared with 1,500 on 1st January, 1959. Provincial applications increased by over 1,500 and this is largely attributed to the concessions introduced last August, namely, extension of distance covered by standard rental to three miles of all exchanges, application of residence rental rate to farmers and enlargement of local call areas. Since these measures were designed primarily to stimulate rural telephone development, the increase in demand is gratifying. We aim at connecting 15,000 new telephones in the current calendar year; for the first four months which have already passed, installation of new telephones has averaged over 1,200 per month.

In the Finglas and Walkinstown areas of Dublin, over 400 applications have had to be held up pending the installation of additional automatic exchange equipment and in Cork city there are about 400 on the waiting list for the same reason. It is expected that it will be possible to provide service for the bulk of Finglas-Walkinstown applicants later this year. In Cork city, two new automatic exchanges have been erected and installation of equipment is in hand; it is expected that these two exchanges will be opened in about four months' time, following which service will be provided for the waiting applicants as quickly as possible.

Last year, I outlined the new plans for future telephone development and in particular, the introduction of the group charging system for telephone calls. Under this system, which came into force on 1st August last, all exchanges were arranged into groups for charging purposes, local call areas were considerably extended and a simplified scale of trunk charges was provided. The total cost to the Department of this and other concessions was estimated at £125,000 per annum. The new system has worked very satisfactorily for subscribers generally. The relatively small number of complaints received referred principally to the non-application of local call fees between certain adjacent areas, or to delays on certain routes arising out of the extension of the local call areas.

On the first point, the simple answer is that we could not have afforded any further concession. On the second point, it is unfortunately the case that arising out of the introduction of the extended local call areas, delay has arisen on several routes. It was not possible to plan against this; we had to wait and see what growth emerged and where it arose. Steps are being taken to provide the necessary additional circuits on the routes affected as rapidly as possible but it will take some considerable time to cater for all the demands because we also have to provide for normal traffic growth and it will be necessary to undertake extensive cable schemes on many routes.

I also mentioned last year the plans being made to extend the full long distance subscriber trunk dialling facility, which is at present available on the Athlone and Cork exchanges only. The necessary equipment has now been ordered, and installation is expected within the next 12 to 18 months, for the introduction of subscriber trunk dialling at Drogheda, Dublin, Dundalk, Galway, Limerick, Mullingar, Naas, Sligo and Waterford. In addition, equipment has been ordered and installation is expected within two years for the conversion of seven groups of exchanges to automatic working with subscriber trunk dialling facilities. The seven groups comprise a total of 50 exchanges in the following areas—Balbriggan, Curragh Camp, Kildare, Midleton, New Ross, Roscommon and Tuam.

I also referred last year to the innovation in this country of providing trunk circuits by means of radio links. The first of these, between Galway and Athlone, is in course of erection and, although it has been delayed somewhat for technical reasons, its completion is expected by the end of the year. A contract has also been placed for a radio link connecting Sligo with Bundoran and Donegal, and contracts will be placed shortly for similar radio systems to link Waterford with Wexford and Enniscorthy, and Dublin with Wicklow.

In concluding my review of the telephone service, I wish to refer to a matter which gave rise to some discussion in this House a few months ago, that is, the small print in the telephone directory. The main complaints were about the thin or light impression of the new type and the smallness of the telephone numbers. At the time I undertook to see whether the objections which were made to the type could be met for the next issue of the directory. I am glad to say that the type to be used in the next issue will give a heavier or thicker impression, the telephone numbers will be larger and the heavy entries and exchange names will be accentuated.

It will be necessary to come to the House with a new Telephone Capital Bill later this year. That occasion will provide a further opportunity to review the position of the telephone service.

Post Office Savings Bank deposits in 1959 amounted, in round figures, to £16.74 millions, an increase of £1.34 millions on 1958; withdrawals at £14.88 millions showed an increase of £.3 millions. Moreover the withdrawals included an amount estimated at £.93 millions which was reinvested in Exchequer Stock, Savings Certificates and Prize Bonds. Estimating interest for the year at £1.95 millions, the total balance due to depositors at 31st December, 1959, was £82,500,000 as compared with £78,750,000 at 31st December, 1958.

Deposits by Trustee Savings Banks during the year amounted to £1.48 millions, an increase of £.62 millions, and withdrawals to £.64 millions, an increase of £.21 millions. At the end of the year, the balance to credit of the banks, including interest, was £13.75 millions, being £1.2 millions over the figure at the end of 1958.

Sales of Savings Certificates in 1959 at £3.04 millions were up by £.35 millions on the previous year's figure and the repayments, including interest, of £2.25 millions were down by £.36 millions, making a total improvement of £.71 millions on the previous year's figure.

So many factors may affect the total net investment in these savings services that it is difficult to point to any particular reason for the overall improvement but we can all be grateful to the Savings Committee for their efforts in promoting the savings habit amongst our people.

The postal order and money order services were extended from the 28th March this year. Postal orders of value £3, £4 and £5 were introduced while the limit for money orders issued and payable within the State was raised from £50 to £100. Certain adjustments in poundage were also made, with the object of placing the services, particularly with regard to low value orders, on a more secure basis economically.

The number of money orders issued in 1959 was approximately the same as in 1958 but the average value increased somewhat from £11 8s. to £11 12s.

There was a decrease in 1959, as compared with 1958, of about 9 per cent. in the number of postal orders issued. This decrease which was due mainly to a reduction in the use of lower value postal orders for crossword and other competitions, had the effect of increasing the average value of a postal order issued from 7/10d. in 1958 to 8/7d. in 1959.

The larger works wholly or substantially completed since last year include the new district sorting offices in Crumlin and in Churchtown, Dublin, the new post office in Letterkenny and the new post office in Galway which is to be opened very shortly. The buildings for the two regional automatic exchanges in Cork city are now being equipped. The first stage of a substantial improvements scheme at Bray Post Office was completed and the remaining work of enlarging and modernising the public office there is in progress.

At the present time work is also in progress on a new post office at Droichead Nua and buildings for automatic telephone exchanges at Athy, Portlaoise, Tullamore and Walkinstown in Dublin. Contracts have been placed for improvement works at Gorey Post Office and for an automatic telephone exchange building at Mallow, whilst tenders have been invited for automatic telephone exchange buildings at An Uaimh and Malahide. Work is also expected to begin before the end of the year on extensive improvements to the public part of Limerick Post Office, and on the building of a new post office and telephone exchange at Wicklow.

When speaking on the Estimates last year I said that the sketch plans for the new central sorting office in Dublin had been approved. The contract drawings are now being prepared and whilst it is rather difficult to give reliable forecasts for such a large project I am hopeful that the piled foundations for the structure, now in the design stage, will have been laid before the end of next year and that the main building contract will be placed not too long afterwards.

The number of staff provided for in the Estimate is 16,321. The increase of 142 over last year is due to an addition of some 170 to the professional and technical grades of the Engineering Branch partially offset by a reduction of 28 in the numbers employed in other grades there and elsewhere in the Department.

Preliminary work is in progress with a view to the introduction of an automatic data processing system in the Post Office Savings Bank in 1961. This system, which will be based on use of an electronic calculator, should lead to substantial savings in the administrative costs of the bank. Some redundancy of staff is likely to arise but it is expected that we can solve this by transfers to other Departments and, while the redundancy lasts, by employing people on work normally performed by other grades. The various staff associations have already been advised of the general outline of the scheme in so far as it will affect the staff and, at a later stage, problems arising out of the redundancy will be discussed with the staff side under the conciliation and arbitration scheme.

So as to keep abreast with progress in the techniques of industrial management representatives of the Department have attended Seminars, Conferences and Instructional Courses organised by the Irish Management Institute and other bodies working in similar fields. These courses covered such subjects as "Work Study", "Transport Management" and "Management through People". The experience and information acquired at these courses and the contacts established there are of considerable value. In purely postal and telecommunication matters the same spread of knowledge is achieved by membership of the specialised international bodies such as the Universal Postal Union and by informal contacts with other administrations whose experience is always readily put at our disposal.

In addition to the normal Engineering Branch training schemes for technical grades, a series of special courses on new exchange techniques was given to engineers, inspectors and trainees by a representative of one of the Department's contractors.

The Commercial Accounts for 1958/59 show that we made a profit in that year of £277,576. So far as 1959/60 is concerned I said, in reply to a Parliamentary Question on 6th April, that on such information as was available it was estimated we would make a net profit of about £265,000. We have not yet got all the data necessary to prepare detailed accounts for 1959/60 and so my statement of 6th April still stands good— for the present at any rate.

I approach the question of a forecast for this year with some reserve because, while we can usually estimate our expenditure closely, we cannot be so certain about our revenue. And it is to be remembered that a variation of even as little as 1 per cent. in revenue implies a difference of over £100,000 in receipts, a very considerable amount in relation to the net profit. However, subject to these remarks, and assuming no unexpected events, I think we should show a profit which will show little change overall from the profit in any of the last few years.

Both our gross expenditure and our gross revenue will however be higher than before. The Civil Service pay award has increased our staff costs by a half million pounds a year. On the revenue side the reduction in telephone charges which was made last August was expected to cost us £125,000 a year. So far as we have been able to judge, that estimate was an accurate one. The increases in postal and telegraph rates which we made at the end of March should bring us in £185,000 a year. It is satisfactory that although our expenses rose so sharply we were able, by making a net increase of only £60,000 in charges, to adhere to the principle that, taking one year with another, the Post Office should pay its way. That is the principle which has been accepted by successive Governments. Its soundness needs no emphasis from me.

This fairly satisfactory position is, as I indicated last year, due to the steady increase in our volume of traffic. People are writing more, they are becoming more telephone conscious and, in both those services, we can handle more business without a corresponding increase in costs. The one black spot is the telegraph service; it is impossible to eliminate the loss there and we must be watchful to prevent it being any more of a financial burden than is possible.

I referred earlier to the relatively small increase of staff provided for in the Estimate. The fact that with this small increase we are able to cater for a greater increase in business is of itself a tribute to the competence and zeal of all grades of the Post Office service. As Minister, I am happy to express in this House my appreciation of their services during the past year.

I move:

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

The statement made by the Minister is detailed. On the whole, it seems that the position with regard to the services rendered by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs is satisfactory from a financial point of view with the exception of the telegraph service. The loss incurred on the telegraph service may be due to a large extent to the increased cost of telegrams. It is certainly true to say that the cost of telegrams is entirely too high and that a person will think twice or three times before sending a telegram. The loss may also be due to some extent to the increased use of the telephone. Telephones have been installed in many country areas, a development which is very satisfactory. Up to recently, I suppose this country had the lowest number of telephones of any country in the world.

It is regrettable that the Minister found it necessary to increase postal and telegraph charges, because, since the reorganisation was introduced—I think by Deputy Everett when he was Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in 1948—while postal deliveries are satisfactory in all parts of the country, I understand that the daily service is not yet available in every part of the country, though there is also a better method of delivering letters from headquarters to the various sub-offices in the different counties.

Speaking of sub-offices, I must refer to the necessity for increasing the salaries—they can scarcely be called salaries—of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses. Of all the people in the employment of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, they have been the worst paid down through the years. Of course, the idea is that as a rule they have some other way of making their living. They may have a shop or something else and they may depend upon the people who come in to do business in the post office making a purchase. However, I do not think that should be taken into consideration at all. In fact, it is surprising that there have been so few cases of embezzlement or misappropriation of public funds, because there must be a great temptation to these people who are handling so much money. They may be very short themselves and to tide them over some emergency, they may perhaps appropriate to themselves some of the available money in the hope of being able to repay it before being caught.

On the whole, these sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses have done very good work and have proved themselves very honest and efficient in the discharge of their duties, in spite of the way they have been treated financially. I do not know what protection could be given to them. We know that recently many attacks have been made on them, and especially on sub-postmistresses. I am sure the Garda Síochána will see to their protection.

Not only are these people paid low salaries but also the wages of postmen are something of which we cannot be proud. They do their work efficiently and well; they are out in all kinds of weather and have to do long journeys. In some cases, it may not be a whole-time job, but they are badly paid for the work they have to do. There is, in the grade of postman, a rank called auxiliary postman. It is very unfair that when those men reach the age of 70, they retire and have nothing to fall back on but the old age pension. I do not know whether it would require legislation, or some alteration of a regulation in the Post Office service to establish them. In fact, I could never see why they are not established and entitled to some gratuity or pension, big or small, on reaching the age of 70, because many of them have no other means when they retire except the old age pension. Indeed, during their term as auxiliary postmen, or established postmen, they cannot have anything to spare.

As regards means of travel for postmen, I think there was a regulation at one time—I do not know if it exists now—in certain areas that the postmen must walk. In some cases, they might have to walk many miles. In other cases, they were allowed to use a bicycle. I do not see why a postman should not be allowed any mode of transport he desires, even a motor car, which, of course, he could not afford, unless he had some other means. I know that in some cases a motor car would be allowed, if the postman were suffering from any disability.

I cannot tell exactly what changes have been made but I know some changes have been made and I am sure they are for the better. I understand postmen are paid also in accordance with the number of hours they work and I suppose if they have to walk, their hours are longer and if they cycle, their hours are shorter, and if they use a motor cycle or a car, they are still shorter. I do not think the means of transport at their disposal should affect their remuneration in any way.

The uniforms of the postmen are not very spectacular. They are dull. After all, our postmen go into every part of the country; they meet various people, and tourists see them. They should have a brighter uniform, a smart uniform, and not something that looks as if it were handed to them to throw on their backs. I suppose a great deal depends on the men themselves but it is not very easy to look smart in a uniform that is anything but smart. The same applies to the postbags. They may be good for the safety of the letters or the parcels within them and keep them perfectly dry, but they are of a most peculiar make. I believe they are made in jail by prisoners and they look as if they belong there, too.

There is not very much else I wish to say in connection with this matter because a very full statement has been given, but I should like to say that the Minister has always been very courteous, as have his officials, so far as I am concerned. I am sure others will agree that all those connected with the Post Office itself, including sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses, have always been courteous and have tried to carry out their duties to the best of their abilities. They perform good work and the people should be grateful for the service they render.

Last year, when I spoke on this Estimate, the Minister was new to office. I raised a number of matters then asking the Minister to look into them when the discussion on the Estimate was over, knowing, of course, that at that time the Minister could not be expected to be as familiar with the administrative activities of the Department as I have no doubt he is this year.

I want, therefore, to raise with the Minister some matters of importance, mainly from the staff point of view. I notice that this year we seem to be somewhat nearer to the provision of a central sorting office in Dublin. That will obviate the necessity for my recapitulating the deficiencies and infirmities of the building which at present serves as the central sorting and delivery office in Dublin. I notice the Minister indicates that the contract drawings are now being prepared and that he is hopeful that the piled foundations for the structure which are now at the design stage will be ready before the end of next year and that the main building contract will be placed not too long afterwards. It seems to me that the earliest date at which the main building contract will be placed is 1962. That is on the assumption that these target forecasts are maintained.

Of course, this whole building has a notorious reputation for fractured and frustrated targets. Various Ministers for Posts and Telegraphs have attempted to give approximate years when the work would commence only to see the years pass by and that old building remain there, defiant of everybody's efforts to replace it by something that would look a credit to our capital city and which would be an efficient edifice in which post office business could be transacted without all the hardships and inconveniences which are suffered by the staff who have to work in such an unsuitable and outmoded building.

I wonder whether the Minister at this stage would like to give any indication as to when the building will be completed. I can appreciate his nervousness in not wishing to do so. I promise I will never mention the matter again if he hazards a guess. That will be an assurance of my good will in the matter. I wonder whether the Minister would hazard a guess today? If we start the building in 1962 how long will it take to erect it? I take it the Office of Public Works will be acting for the Minister and will have an idea as to what it will cost to erect a building which will involve an expenditure of £800,000 because they are familiar with this type of building terrain.

I am anxious to know whether it is likely to take two, three or four years in which to erect the building or whether we might now compose ourselves and say that the new sorting and delivery office will be ready for occupation in 1965 or 1966 providing existing targets remain and do not follow the pattern of previous targets. I do not know if the Minister would like to venture an estimate of that. At all events, it is somewhat consoling to know that at last we are getting to the stage at which by the end of 1961 the pile foundations of the structure may be laid. I hope in the meantime there will not be another change in the site of the building and that the laying of the pile foundations will mean that the post office will be erected on top of the pile foundations.

This business has had such a long and chequered career that one hesitates to count with any certitude on the inevitable happening. I suppose the best we can do is to wait and see what is likely to come out of the matter when the pile foundations find their way into the earth.

The Minister talked about a new method of sorting and indicated that there is an increasing number of streets and thoroughfares generally in Dublin. I think he mentioned something over three thousand. It is difficult for the staff adequately to remember all these streets and thoroughfares and the offices to which letters for them should be sent for sorting. It is because of this great expansion of the city and the spreading out of the population that it has been necessary for the Post Office to face up to the necessity of building new offices for sorting and delivery purposes in various parts of the city. Some of these areas are now teeming reservoirs of human population. I have in mind Finglas.

I did not hear any mention by the Minister of the Post Office programme in respect of the new office which I understood it is proposed to erect at Finglas. Will the Minister give us any indication as to whether the work will be commenced there this year and if so when the work is likely to finish there? The Churchtown office is another building which I think is under way at present and is probably half completed. Does the Minister anticipate that the Churchtown office will be completed and be ready for operation this year? I should like some information about these two offices in particular.

At Newbridge, in County Kildare, the Post Office are engaged in building a new post office and telephone exchange where, of course, it is urgently needed. The work is in progress. What is the date in the contract for the completion of that work and when is it expected that the work on the office will be completed? I do not raise these building matters as an indication, however remote, of criticism against the building section of the Minister's Department.

The building section of the Post Office Department has always been enlightened, progressive and anxious to keep abreast of the times. Unfortunately, it is not its own agent. Between the normal difficulties of acquisition of land, and so on, the problem of getting attention from the Office of Public Works is one which is sufficient to overload the officials of the building section with more than a fair quota of sorrow.

My questions on this and my subsequent observations on the Post Office buildings are not intended in the slightest to reflect on the building section of the Department for which I have a very considerable admiration. Has any adequate survey been made of Post Office buildings? The Post Office is responsible for all the head offices throughout the country and the salaried sub-offices: I suppose there are about 100 of them. The Post Office has no responsibility for the erection of sub-post office buildings but I take it the Post Office has made some survey of the existing head and salaried sub-offices. If so, at what places has the Post Office decided new buildings are necessary to meet the considerable expansion of post office business down through the years and in what offices is substantial reconstruction necessary to provide the extended accommodation necessary not only for the public but for the satisfactory transaction of business by the staff?

The one thing that strikes one in different towns throughout the country is that if you come across an old post office it is generally a dreary, weary institution. There is a look of drabness and misery about the whole setup. It bears no favourable comparison with modern shops in the town or city. Generally speaking, there is no comparison whatever between the architectural facade of a post office and the banks and shops and other modern buildings. The Post Office has wares to sell in the form of services. It ought, therefore—as indeed it does in the new offices—endeavour to brighten the fronts of the post offices and modernise them internally in a general way so as to ensure that the Post Office Department and its branches throughout the country have buildings of which the entire service and the public should be proud.

The Post Office is not yielding a loss. The Post Office is yielding a surplus of £250,000 per year. By any standard that is a very substantial surplus. The Post Office administration ought to assert for itself the right to modernise its buildings and have the facilities available in these places in view of its generally prosperous financial position. It is entitled, because of the widespread character of its services, to get from the Government reasonable priority in supplying the essential needs of its own services in the matter of those buildings. I would ask the Minister how many new offices it will be necessary to build and at what towns and cities extensive reconstructions will be necessary.

I raised last year, too, I think, the question of giving greater authority to postmasters to undertake repair work on their own initiative instead of their request for repairs having to come through the Post Office centrally, on to the Board of Works and then along a shuttle service of correspondence between the Board of Works and the Post Office Department, resulting in the seemingly interminable delays which take place before even very small repairs can be carried out to a post office.

A person who becomes a postmaster reaches that position only after long years of satisfactory service and after he has been thoroughly vetted by Post Office boards which are usually fairly hawk-eyed in ascertaining the ability and the standard of competence of the person who passes through the Board. I would suggest to the Minister that there is no point in treating the postmaster as a nincompoop who knows nothing about these matters at all. If he had to carry out repairs to his own house he would do it creditably. He ought to be given more authority in regard to carrying out repairs. These repair jobs ought to be done locally on the Postmaster's initiative without having to create the nightmare of everything having to go to headquarters to be cleared there so as to ensure that everything is as perfect as the people in control in Dublin can make it.

I want to raise a question about the deliveries. There is a firm in my constituency which is a first-class firm from the point of view of the employment it gives and because of the fact that about 60 per cent. of its products —they are relatively new products for this country—are sent to the export market. The export market is not just Britain or America. They send their products to many places throughout the world. The firm in question is Irish Ropes. I have to mention their name in order to explain the extent of my grievance.

They recently established a branch in England where they are also doing very valuable work selling goods on the English market. The volume of goods that will be sold there will increase. If they get a letter from their English headquarters, it arrives here in the morning by the mail boat. It arrives about 7 o'clock but the day mail from Dublin to Cork via Newbridge has left Dublin at 6.30 with the result that the English letter, arriving at 7 o'clock, is in Dublin and the Cork train has departed at 6.30.

Newbridge is about 28 miles from Dublin. What do you think happens the letter? The letter just stays in Dublin until 6.30 the next morning and the firm does not get it until 24 hours afterwards. I put it to the Minister that some steps ought to be taken in a case such as that. I know the Post Office suggested that the firm should get the letter delivered to their Dublin office and get the Dublin office to ring up and tell the Newbridge office what is in the letter. That is to be taken down by shorthand typists in Newbridge.

I do not understand why the Post Office would not make another dispatch to Newbridge. It would cost very little. I will not say merely to Newbridge. They ought to make a dispatch to other places as well if the need for it can be established. Here is a firm doing its best to get into the British market and to maintain a foothold there. Yet it finds, because its English letters arrive at 6.30 and after the Cork train has left, it cannot get the letters for another 24 hours.

It ought to be possible to make up another bag and send it down by a later train to Newbridge, have it collected at Newbridge and delivered. That could be done in a number of other cases where similar circumstances existed. I see no reason why a firm in Newbridge ought to have its letters read over the phone to its Newbridge office and the details taken down in the year 1960. Talk about electronic methods of doing things in the Minister's speech!

I think this matter has been brought to the notice of the Post Office but all the firm gets by way of enthusiasm and encouragement for its efforts is to be told to have the letters sent to their Dublin office and get them read over the phone even though the letters involved might contain drawings, sketches or other enclosures which could not be properly communicated over the telephone. I hope the Minister will look into that and get the Post Office to adopt some 1960 remedy in this particular case.

The question of uniform clothing was another matter I raised last year. I said then—and I want to repeat it now—that the uniform for postmen is of a quality which seems to collect every particle of dust in an office. The clothing is supposed to be blue but, in fact, it is such a dust collector that it is more frequently a greyish colour than blue. That is so because the material has a soft surface.

It seems to me to be a much inferior cloth to the cloth in the Garda uniform. It certainly does not give the postman a smart appearance. It does not seem to hold its shape. It seems to collect dust and get untidy. I think that in a matter of this kind you may have to go through a period of trial and error but some effort ought to be made, in the interests of the appearance of the outdoor force and in the interest of the Post Office service generally, to get some kind of cloth which will give the postmen a better uniform than they have today. The present uniform is unsuitable. It is hard to imagine it is not possible, with so many mills in the country, to devise some kind of uniform material which would give better results, a better appearance and eliminate the dust collecting proclivities of the present material.

In the course of his statement the Minister indicated that telegraph reorganisation was now almost completed and it did not seem likely that any further substantial economies could be effected. I should like to ask the Minister does that mean now the Post Office is settling down so far as its telegraph service is concerned and recognising that the present position is going to remain its basic telegraph set-up? I notice that the Minister says that the fall in telegraph traffic amounted to four per cent. last year. One can appreciate that changes will have to be made if telegraph traffic continues to fall, as it is falling in practically every country in the world. The more you develop the telephone, as experience has shown, the more you help to kill the telegraph service and the more people who instal telephones the less they will be inclined to use the telegraph service except for purposes where the written word is regarded as essential.

Could the Minister say whether redundancy in the telegraph service is now at an end or is it still to be assumed that there is redundancy in the telegraph service and, if so, what is its extent? What steps are the Post Office authorities taking to deal with the matter? Do they propose to allow it to waste itself out through relirals, deaths, promotions and so on, or have they a special method in mind for dealing with the problem? Last year I mentioned that this was a matter which affected a lot of people and I urged the Minister to give sympathetic consideration to their interests.

I am glad to say that the Minister gave me that assurance and that the Post Office have, particularly in the past twelve months, acted in a reasonable manner and not in a way that was harsh or which imposed needless suffering on the members of the staff, but the staff would like to know is this the end? They would like to know if they have come out of the crucible, if it is now all over and if they will now be allowed to function without fear of being told that they are redundant and with the prospect of being transferred to other branches of the service to which they do not want to go and with the operations of which they are not familiar. I should like the Minister to tell us something on that subject when he is concluding.

I asked a question here on the 26th April to ascertain how many posts had been suppressed in the Post Office Department in 1958-59 and 1959-60, covering a variety of grades from overseer to junior postman. The Minister gave me some statistical information in reply. I should like to ask the Minister some questions arising from his reply. For example, according to the Minister's reply 28 Post Office clerkships, Grade A, were suppressed in 1958-59; 21 Post Office clerkships Grade B were suppressed in 1958-59, and 30 full time postmen's posts were suppressed in 1959. In 1959-60 43 Post Office clerkships Grade B were suppressed and 21 postmen's full time posts were suppressed. I cannot understand how these suppressions have taken place in an expanding service. I should like to ask the Minister what brought about the suppression of these indoor posts, the clerk posts, and the suppression of the 51 full time postmen's posts in the two years? It is not clear from the answer whether the 51 outdoor posts were suppressed because that number of full time posts were down-graded from full-time to part-time, which of course would be a very retrogressive policy and something which we thought the Post Office had abandoned in other years.

It may well be that that is not the explanation but I have a suspicion that it is and that a large number of full-time posts have been reduced from full-time to part-time which, as I said, is against what was expected and against the normal run of Post Office policy in recent years. I should like to know from the Minister whether, so far as he is concerned, he stands for a policy of cutting back full-time posts to part-time posts with all the hardship, inconvenience and rates of pay associated with these part-time posts. I would hardly imagine that the Minister would adopt this as a general policy and I think it desirable that he should clear the air on the matter. It may well be that some posts have to go because of fluctuations in work but it is another thing if, for the purpose of achieving economies when they have a surplus of £250,000, the Post Office should embark upon cutting down posts from full-time to part-time. I hope the Minister's statement will be reassuring on that point.

I want also to refer to a decision by the Post Office Department to require female telephonists to work until 11 o'clock at night. The old practice, in the days when the Post Office had a much more gallant outlook on ladies than it has today, was that womenfolk were never employed after 8 p.m. During the last war, however, in an effort to assist the Department, a number of telephonists worked until 10 p.m. The Post Office made virtue out of necessity and said: "That is a good idea; they should be kept working until 10 p.m.". Various efforts have been made to induce the Post Office to abandon the employment of female staff after 8 p.m. and to restore the previous and normal practice that women were never employed after 8 p.m.

Far from being regretful about their attitude the Post Office have now decided that they will employ telephonists until 11 p.m. In other words, not only do they not propose to go back to 8 p.m. but they are going on to 11 p.m. I know it can be argued that you can see waitresses working at 11 o'clock at night and that you can see nurses working at night. That does not seem to be an argument against the complaint at all. You cannot have male nurses working at night and dealing with all kind of patients of different sexes, but the Post Office have the obvious remedy in this case. They can find men to do the late work and I can see no reason why they do not get men to do the late work and restore the previous practice.

From the point of view of the Post Office, male operators work as efficiently as female operators; from the point of view of the service they give, the service would be as good by male operators as by female operators. There is only one advantage to the Post Office in keeping telephonists on duty until 11 p.m., that is, that they are cheaper and the Post Office employs them because they are cheaper and the Post Office, which can show a substantial surplus on the telephone side of its operations, nevertheless continues to require girls to work at present up to 10 p.m. and unless it abandons its new intention they will be employed until 11 p.m.

I put it to the Minister that requiring girls to work until 11 p.m. is objectionable to the girls; it is a retrograde policy and one which is bound to beget the steadfast hostility of these girls. The telephone service is of vital importance to the public; it is absolutely essential that the highest possible measure of goodwill and co-operation should exist in the operation of a service of that kind, but you cannot get goodwill and co-operation from people by worsening their hours of attendance. The service should be willing to pay in decent conditions for the goodwill and co-operation and undoubted efficiency which they get from the staff employed in the telephone section of the Department. This is not just a matter of deciding the issue by reference to what is written in cold, impersonal files or of filling in the squares on duty-charts or looking at red lines or black lines.

There is a human problem in this matter and I should like the Minister to look into this personally as I believe a solution can be found for the difficulty which will continue to beget the goodwill and co-operation of the telephone staff and, at the same time, provide the public with as good a service as they are getting to-day. I urge the Minister strongly not to take a decision in this matter which I think would churn up and throw into question a good relationship and a standard of co-operation without which it is not possible to maintain any efficient service.

The next point I want to raise concerns early morning deliveries in Dublin and elsewhere throughout the country. At present postmen are required in many cases to attend for duty at 6 a.m. I do not suppose there is anybody else in the street except postmen at 6 a.m., apart, perhaps from the occasional milkman. But postmen continue to be required to attend at 6 a.m. and to get out with their delivery and be on the street between 7 and 8 a.m. If a postman has a small packet to deliver or a registered letter from the income tax authorities or from some beneficent uncle sending a cheque, he cannot put it in the letter-box. He must try to get a member of the household up and the householder usually appears at the door half-clad having been disturbed from his slumbers just to sign for the Land Commission or the income tax registered letter.

The Post Office fondly believe that they are conferring a great benefit on citizens by getting them out of bed at 7 or 7.15 or 7.45 in the morning to sign for such letters. The householder takes the letter and promptly throws it on the table and goes back to finish his sleep but that does not matter to the Post Office. They think people enjoy getting up to sign for these letters and going back to bed. I put it to the Minister that in 1960, it is time that there was another look at this whole business. It does seem absurd to deliver letters and to struggle to deliver registered letters and newspapers by knocking at doors at an hour of the morning when every intelligent citizen is asleep, and not merely knocking once, but two or three times, because if the postman does not get rid of the parcel or packet he has to deliver, he must bring it back to his office and take it out again, when the streets are well aired and when the citizen who was resting in the morning has come out of his place of residence at a natural hour.

I put it to the Minister that that is a matter which ought to be examined. I am quite sure he can give the public an efficient service in the morning without having people on duty at 6 a.m. If the Minister knows where Walkinstown is and found he had to get to Pearse Street by 6 o'clock in the morning, he would find that in fact he had to be out of bed by 5 a.m. or 4.45 a.m. and that would be his regular life or, if you like, his irregular life which he would lead regularly. This matter ought to be reconsidered and examined by the administration and the staff side to see if it is possible to evolve a scheme of delivery which will give the public a delivery of letters at a reasonable hour, without at the same time requiring postmen to be out of their beds before 5 o'clock in the morning as a regular arrangement right through the year.

No other branch of State service, not even the Defence Forces, finds it necessary to do this. Even from the point of view of police duties, I venture to say there is a very minimum of police out of bed at 4.45 a.m. and I do not know any other kind of activity in the State that requires such a high percentage of staff to be out of bed so early in the morning. If it were absolutely necessary, one might face up to it, but I am sure that with the application of intelligence to the problem and a willingness to rethink on the whole matter and not just try to justify it by referring to the fact that it has been there for a long time, it would be possible for the staff and the Post Office to come to a satisfactory arrangement which would give reasonable service to the public and tolerable hours of attendance to the staff.

I want to congratulate the Minister on the very satisfactory report he has been able to give us in introducing this Vote. The surplus revealed on the year's working is very substantial and the Department for which the Minister is responsible is probably the only Department of State which runs more or less on a commercial basis and makes a satisfactory profit. Profit in any undertaking is something that gives satisfaction to all concerned. However, there are many ways of making a profit and while I do not entirely subscribe to all the points made by the previous speaker, if the profit is obtained at the cost of denying to certain personnel forming part of the organisation, concessions and perquisites to which they are entitled, I think it is a wrong principle. Taking the Department of Posts and Telegraphs as a whole, I think the Minister has done a very good job in the year under review. But, no matter how good the job, inevitably there will be some complaints and some contentious matters raised here.

There are one or two aspects in particular to which I should like to refer. It seems inevitable for the telegraph service to lose money. The position has been discussed year after year here and the loss tends to increase rather than diminish. The Minister carried out a reorganisation scheme in connection with the telephone service last July and that must inevitably react on the telegraph service.

Recently the Department increased the cost of telegrams. Increasing the cost of something does not always make up for a loss. It seems to be the method most generally adopted to meet a deficiency but, if my memory serves me correctly, there have been fairly substantial increases in the cost of telegrams over the last five or six years and those increases have certainly not remedied the situation. We can all of us remember when a telegram cost 1/- or 1/6d. The same telegram today costs 3/-. I often wonder if it is entirely wise to increase the cost of telegrams to meet a deficiency in the service. On the whole, the undertaking is a very successful one and it would not be reasonable, in my opinion, to expect every section to pay its way or make a profit.

There is a potential market where telegrams of congratulation and condolence are concerned. I think that type of telegram should be encouraged. It is a medium of communication which would be availed of to a very considerable extent if the charges were a little bit more reasonable. As far as congratulations and condolence go, the telegram is an ideal form of communication. The number of telegrams sent will, I believe, seriously decline as a result of the recent increase. I suggest that after a certain time the Minister should review the position to find out what effect exactly these increased charges have. I think he will find the number of telegrams will decline and I am very doubtful that he will get the extra revenue he anticipates.

The more telegrams you handle, the more you lose. That is the unfortunate aspect of it.

It certainly looks like that. The Minister referred to the reorganisation of the telephone system. That is something upon which the Minister is to be congratulated. The policy of the Post Office is inclined to be conservative. In the number of years in which they have been in existence they have very rarely thrown out a sprat to catch a salmon, as it were. Now they have introduced a businesslike approach to the whole matter. The Minister is to be congratulated on the success of that approach. It did occur to me that this reorganisation might adversely affect postage revenue. It is now more practicable and more expeditious to deal with certain matters by telephone rather than go to the trouble of writing, or dictating, a letter, as the case may be. The Minister's bold approach is reaping very satisfactory results.

The Minister referred to complaints from certain areas. No matter what way the Minister zones the country it will be impossible to satisfy everyone, and people will have to adopt a reasonable attitude. On average, the Minister has done a very good job in a very short time. There are cases in which subscribers find a certain divergence in telephone charges. In one direction a phone call may cost 1/- or 1/6d. whereas a phone call over the same distance in another direction may work out much cheaper. By and large, I think it works out pretty fairly on the whole.

The Minister referred to some congestion brought about as a result of this new arrangement. I have had some experience of that and I must say there is very little congestion, far less than I thought there would be under the circumstances, remembering the increase, as shown by the returns, in the number of phone calls. I think the capital cost of installation could be reduced if a lower rental were charged in rural areas because, if the rental were reduced, the number of subscribers would increase. The initial capital cost involved is fairly considerable. The policy should be to use poles for the greatest possible number of connections thereby reducing the capital cost involved per subscriber. A preferential rate would encourage more rural subscribers.

Country people are still somewhat conservative about the telephone. They seem to have a suspicion that installation might in some way increase valuations. I think the Minister would be well advised, when replying, to indicate clearly that there is no danger in that direction. When I have stressed the advantages of the telephone I have been met with the reply that the installation of a phone would increase valuation: "It would be like putting on a room, or making some other improvement in the House; we would have the Commissioner of Valuation down on as to increase our valuations." Many country people are still frightened about that. The Minister should set their minds at rest by stating specifically that the Commissioner of Valuation does not take cognisance of telephone installations.

The Minister referred to the group charge with which I have dealt briefly already, and I notice the estimated cost is £125,000 for the first year. The Minister said the system worked very satisfactorily for subscribers and I think he indicated that the estimated loss to the Exchequer is fairly well within limits and he has no reason to expect that he will become involved in any deeper financial obligation than was estimated.

The courtesy of the staff operating the telephone service is first-class. These people have to work under very nerve-wracking conditions and they do a very good job. I must congratulate the Minister on the fact that the degree of courtesy which is displayed to subscribers has been increasing in recent years. I wholeheartedly join with Deputy Norton in the appeal he has made that, as far as possible, the operators of telephone exchanges should not be asked to work long hours, that their service should be appreciated as something which is not found in every walk of life. The general conditions applicable to established officers in the Department are fairly satisfactory but their hours rotate which is another difficulty which most employees would not find pleasant.

Deputy Palmer and Deputy Norton made a plea for some improvement in the type of uniform issued to the postmen. I have no complaint to make about that myself; more important than the improvement of postmen's uniforms is the formulation of some system of establishment for them. Every year when this Estimate comes before us for discussion most Deputies who make a contribution to the debate make an appeal that something should be done for unestablished postmen. The attitude of the Post Office authorities is not very convincing. They use the argument that these unestablished postmen are not recruited by the Civil Service Commissioners and they cannot expect to get the same security of employment, pension rights, and so on, as those who are recruited through the Civil Service Commission. The fact that these postmen are not recruited through the Civil Service Commission is no reason why they should be denied the rights enjoyed by other State servants.

These posts are not so important that they have to be filled through the Civil Service Commission who usually recommend suitable candidates for employment in the higher branches of the State service. The postmaster in charge of a district is quite competent to decide by interview the suitability of a person to be a postman. It is quite possible for the Department to lay down minimum qualifications for the appointment of rural or urban postmen and for that person to be appointed from a panel of candidates brought before the local postmaster.

These unestablished postmen give excellent service. Every week of the year we take up the newspaper and find that a postman is retiring after 50 years' service and further down the news item we discover that this man is going out at 70 years of age, perhaps, and is lucky if he gets an old age pension. The Department of Social, Welfare have rather stringent regulations in that connection but I believe these postmen succeed in getting the pension.

That state of affairs is not good enough. These unfortunate men do a very hard job for relatively small pay and some more practical approach should be made to this problem. I earnestly appeal to the Minister to try to reorganise these postmen and to bring them in under some scheme of pensions, whether contributory or otherwise. The Minister probably will suggest that there are other types of pension for which they might qualify but surely they are entitled to something more than the ordinary old age pension when they retire.

There is also the question of recruiting temporary postmen. This is something that causes a good deal of irritation to every Deputy, that is, when a vacancy occurs in a district and the nominees for that vacancy are considered from a list supplied from the local exchange. There is nothing wrong in that. We all subscribe to that system as being a good one, but I think it is narrowed down a little too much.

As far as I understand the requirements are that those who are getting unemployment assistance have first priority. You could have a most suitable person who would be in receipt of some other form of social assistance, perhaps, home assistance, disability allowance or unemployment benefit, and because he does not happen to be in the top priority he is not considered. The system should be revised to include all people who are on any form of unemployment allowance, whether it be unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance. I suppose there is no possibility that the Minister can end the present system of appointing unestablished postmen, but I should like him to look into that.

This is not an Estimate which lends itself to much criticism. That, in itself, is a tribute to both the Minister and his officials. I should like, on the contrary, to be complimentary to the Minister and his Department, a Department which employs over 16,000 and which has set a headline for other Departments in the matter of expenditure.

First, I should like to congratulate the Minister on providing in Galway city, following long local agitation, the fine new G.P.O. building. The building is welcomed both by public and staff and is worthy of the city of Galway. There is one small point. I notice there is no receiving box for letters on the front of the building. Possibly that is a detail to be settled at the last minute. We shall welcome the Minister at the opening ceremony next week.

I also wish to congratulate the Minister on his intention to increase the size of the print in the telephone directory. That will be welcomed by all. I have often been called into a phone box by old people who say to me: "Try and make out that number for ms, sonny." They say they have not got their glasses and I often have to tell them that I have not got my glasses, either.

Twelve months ago, I raised the question of a half-day for postal workers and I was told the matter was under active consideration in the Department. I wonder what is meant by "active"? I should like to know when such a concession will be granted to the staffs.

During the tourist season in Galway, we have quite a heavy mail. I should like to ask the Minister if the summer train service to Galway is being availed of to expedite postal deliveries and collections. I raise this merely because it would help our tourist industry in the west. I should like to see more use made of such slogans as "See Ireland First" and "Ireland for Holidays" in stamp cancellations. I think there is an impression in the Department that unless you can say you have done the Continent, it is not the thing to see Ireland. I think Ireland has a lot to offer, but we shall leave that for another Vote.

I should like again to draw the attention of the Department to the need for a letter box in Barna, Galway. This is an up-and-coming tourist area which caters for large numbers of caravans in the tourist season. It has been suggested by the postal authorities that the traffic would not justify it, but if they give it a trial, I think they will find there will be a demand.

Again, I should like to congratulate the Minister on the new Galway post office building and, in conclusion, to compliment him on the way he has presented this Estimate.

I am sorry the Minister, in his opening statement, did not say that, in the near future at least, he will bring in some kind of pension scheme for our rural postmen. It is a shame to see postmen who have served about 50 years retiring with only 12 months' gratuity. It is high time some Government undertook to bring in some kind of pension scheme for them. I do not think there are a great many postmen to be provided for.

While I welcome to some extent the recent group charge in respect of the telephone service, I disagree with it in other ways. If you live in a country area, you may get a phone call within 25 miles on one side of you for 3d., while on the other side, for a much shorter distance, you have to pay 1/3d. In that way, it is unfair. If it is 3d. in one case, that should apply on all sides.

Speaking on this Estimate last year, I referred to postmen in country areas who asked to have their routes tested. I feel that in certain cases they are not being treated fairly. It may happen that the person who goes out to do the test arrives on some day of the week when the mail is not heavy. He may arrive on a very fine, calm day. In country places, and particularly in the West where you have bad roads and so on, I feel some of them do not get a fair test. I know of certain cases where some of them have asked for a re-test within a certain time and the answer they got back from the people in charge was not very nice. I object to any such answer being sent to a postman who has given faithful and honest service and I think it should not be tolerated in any county. If postmen throughout the country seek to make representations to their T.D.s—no matter what side of the House they are on—they are threatened with dismissal and I take a very strong view of any such notice being issued to any postman. If he does not get satisfaction, if he thinks he is being victimised, it is up to him to tell his T.D., no matter what politics he may hold, and it is up to that T.D. to voice his opinion in this House and tell these people they are just human beings.

My last remark is that I feel it is high time for the Minister and the Department to make a change in the uniform. A postman may get a new uniform but after a couple of months —even, as a matter of fact, after one wet day—it is likely to melt off his back, and I sincerely hope that before the Minister introduces his next Vote in a year's time, he will have changed the uniform at present in use.

I understand there are some places, especially seaside resorts in the west —I mentioned one in particular—that have applied on several occasions for public telephone kiosks but they have been told that the local post office is open until a certain hour at night, and that there is a private telephone available somewhere else. I mentioned the village of Spiddal in particular, but everybody knows that even though there is a public or private telephone in a village, mostly they are in public houses and they also have to close down.

There would be some fellows glad of that excuse to go in.

When a knock comes to the door late at night, the publican may think it is somebody who wants a drink. I know one case that happened less than 12 months ago of a vet being needed in that part of the country and the nearest was in Galway city. Instead of being able to contact him on the telephone, the people concerned had to hire a car, and I should like the Minister to look into that matter.

Had the vet no phone?

Yes, he had.

They all should be able to afford them by now.

I am not rising to criticise the Minister because I am satisfied that he and his Department have a very complex job to do because of the variety of services provided. The public appreciate the many services which the Post Office has initiated over the years, such as the telephone service, which is now in practically every house. That is very helpful but, like other Deputies, I have a grievance in connection with postmen. To my mind, a postman has a hard job. Winter or summer, he must slog along on his bicycle, in hail, rain, or snow, and the time has come when he should be allowed to use a motor bike or a motor car. I know some postmen who have little motor cars of their own but they have to keep them locked up in sheds at home. The most dangerous vehicle on the roads at present is a bike laden with parcels, such as a postman has. He has to carry maybe 7 cwt. on the handlebars, over bad roads, and he is meeting cars travelling at 50 and 60 miles an hour. I believe he should be entitled to drive his own car and I would ask the Minister to reconsider the regulation governing that position.

As regards temporary postmen, there are too many of them and some of them, after 30 years' service, are thrown out on the side of the road with absolutely nothing. Sometimes they get a miserable gratuity, sometimes nothing at all, and I would ask the Minister to appoint them in a permanent capacity or reduce their numbers.

Of recent years I notice we have had many cases of pilfering and theft in post offices. So many of them have arisen in the past four or five years that something must be wrong because that did not happen in the past. Postal officials were always people of good character and integrity and this recent trend has been caused because sub-postmasters are not paid as they should be. They have a genuine grievance. As far as I know, some of them start off with £80 a year and it goes up to £100, or sometimes-more. It is not fair to expect people to carry on a service on such small pittances and I urge the Minister to reconsider their position. They have a great variety of work to do. They have to be people of character and business ability and, as far as I am aware, they have no allowances for rent, for assistance of any type, and no provision for sickness.

There are 101 other things also wrong. They get no gratuities on retirement and they have no allowances for the heating and lighting of their premises. This is a field in which the Minister can do very good work and it must be remembered that sub-postmasters are very important people. After the parish priest and the schoolmaster, the postmaster comes next in order in a town, and the Minister should do something to ensure that they get a reasonable standard of living and be able to pay proper wages to their staffs. At present sub-postmasters throughout the country have to employ young girls and can pay them only very small pittances.

In addition to these grievances, sub-postmasters in the city of Dublin are being menaced by midnight thugs who find post offices are handy places for committing robberies, and some of the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses have actually been attacked by them. They are open to grave danger from that type of thug and it is only right that they should have a reasonable living standard and that their premises should be something they can be proud of when transacting their business. Many post offices are only old tumbledown shacks but sub-postmasters cannot have anything else if they are paid only from £80 to £100. That is scandalous and I think justice should be done to these people.

They are responsible people but they have to depend on the staffs under them, and they should be put in the position to pay reasonable wages to the assistants they have to employ. At present sub-postmasters are not allowed anything for the employment of assistants in country areas. In most cases they have little shops but the business they do in them is merely a bagatelle, and in most cases at present they have to wait a long time for their money to come in. For these reasons, I would ask the Minister to look after the needs of sub-postmasters. He is a very reasonable man and if these people have a grievance, I hope he will help them as much as possible during the next 12 months.

The Minister made a very long and wide-embracing introductory statement and, as I said at the outset, he has a hard and onerous task. I do not think there is any other Department of State in which a Minister has to tread so warily as in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Over a long number of years, we saw all sorts of trouble happening with Ministers in different Governments in charge of that Department. They have to walk very cautiously and therefore I know the Minister has not an easy task. I appreciate that he is a good Minister, doing good work, and I am glad to say that he is a colleague of mine from my own county. I am proud to say that he is a man who has given long years of service in many fields helping the country.

In conclusion, I again ask him to look after the sub-postmasters all over the country. We want our post offices to be places we can be proud of and we should pay our sub-postmasters reasonably well so that they will be able to pay good wages to the assistants they employ. If we do that, we shall not have this pilfering going on over the years. That happens simply because these people are not paid and must get money somewhere. It is very hard on a sub-postmaster who is brought to court as a result of some offence, of which he had not been aware, by an employee. There may have been pilfering in his office for years and he might not know about it. The Post Office require men of character and integrity. They can have them but they must pay their staff. I would ask the Minister to see what he can do to ease the position of sub-postmasters who are badly underpaid.

I should like to join with Deputy Giles and other Deputies who have spoken on behalf of sub-postmasters and their employees in rural Ireland. The Post Office section of the Government take pride in their efficiency and the fact that they are able to run their services on an economic basis. The fact is, of course, that they are, without exaggeration, the worst employers in the State in many regards. That fact is seldom brought home to the public.

Ministers from time to time take refuge behind the argument that sub-postmasters have their union and are in a position to invoke arbitration in respect of their pay. That argument is completely fallacious. I would appeal to this Minister, as a man who always has his ear to the ground, who understands the problems of people in rural Ireland, not to be misled by the ráiméis and patter put up to him by civil servants who are as far removed from the country areas today as their grandfathers who came from rural Ireland and have forgotten all about it.

It is beyond contradiction that there are girls employed in rural Ireland in sub-post offices at a wage of £1 per week, and perhaps less. That is happening under the so-called efficient Department of Posts and Telegraphs. There is very little use in appealing to private employers—who, in many cases, were it not for trade unions, would exploit labour still further—to give good conditions and good wages to their employees when such an example is set by a Department of State which should be setting good example. Of course, it can be argued that because of the fact that up to very recently the appointment of sub-postmasters was on a political basis and that there was such a large number of applicants in most cases, the Department felt that it was safe to leave the emoluments at the bare minimum. Again I say that it is beyond contradiction that the hours that some of these people have to "punch" in are disgraceful in a Christian community. Sub-postmasters in many rural areas are not in a position to pay staff to relieve them.

It may be suggested that very few sub-postmasters are totally dependent on their position as such. Of course, sub-postmasters are not dependent on these positions. In many cases they could not exist for more than three months on their emoluments from the Department of Posts and Telegraphs for working, perhaps, from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. In many instances they have a little shop attached to the post office. It is well known to this Minister, as a man from rural Ireland, that in many small post offices the most that is sold is sweets, perhaps a few loaves of bread, sugar and biscuits. In many cases, if they are able to make a profit of 25/- a week they are doing very well while at the same time trying to keep the post office going. I am asking this Minister to look into that matter personally.

The Minister need only visit any rural post office in his own county or in the west or south to check for himself. I think he knows the position already but possibly he is up against the difficulty that races every Minister when he assumes office, the power of the men behind the throne. Every Deputy, who knows the circumstances in rural Ireland and who feels as I do, has a duty to refer to it in this debate or else to inform the Minister outside the House that he will have the full support of every Deputy in any steps he may take to improve the conditions of employment of sub-postmasters and their assistants.

The other matter I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister is in connection with telephone charges. There has been a great deal of talk about the reduction that has taken place in the cost of local calls in recent months. That trend is welcome but the approach to this question is very timid and uninspired. The argument over the years, in this service as in others, has been that the more people avail themselves of a service the lighter the charge will be on the people using the service. That is a logical conclusion. If there are 20 people using a line which was used by only four persons five years ago, surely the charge should not have increased.

It is at the stage when the demand for telephones is increasing that the Minister should take his courage in his hands and decrease the charges. If he takes the view that he will be snowed under with applications for telephones. so much the better. If there is an accurate estimate of the date of installation, most applicants will be satisfied. It is disheartening in a service like the telephone service that there is no reduction in charges arising from the increase in the numbers availing of the service. For instance, the charge for a telephone call from Roscommon town to Dublin works out at 2/9d.

To my mind, the charges for the public telephone service are far too high. If someone needed to make, say, two or three telephone calls to Dublin, would it not tempt him if he could make, say, two calls at a reduced price. If the charge for a call from Roscommon to Dublin were reduced to 1/9—take off 1/—he could thereby make both calls for the sum of 3/6, rather than the present situation of having to pay 5/6 for the two calls.

The telephone is no longer a luxury to many people. I doubt very much if that fact is taken into consideration by the Central Statistics Office, or any other office, in computing the cost of living. It should be considered, nowadays, because quite apart altogether from the impact on the individual's monetary position, the overall position of the State would improve because of the increased revenue which would accrue, due to the greater demand for the service.

At any rate, I should like to hear the Minister's comments on this matter because it also applies to other services which do not arise on this Estimate. A serious situation obtains in rural Ireland where we have a decreasing population. While we have that decreasing population, we have, at the same time, a very healthy and increasing demand for services like the telephone service. Every effort should be made to ensure that that demand is not stifled or slowed down. When a certain stage is reached so far as applications are concerned, it appears that in the Department there is a slackening off in relation to further applications. It is well time then to consider further increasing the attractiveness of the service, and the most sensible way to do that is to examine into the possibilities of a very generous reduction, a big reduction, in the cost of telephone calls.

There are some genuine and justifiable criticisms to be levelled with regard to delays on the line in many rural areas. I do not know what that is due to but the position is most aggravating. Of course, that again is a factor which is bound to slow down the demand for telephone installations in many rural areas. If a person finds he has to wait, anything from 10 minutes to 50 minutes to obtain a local call within a distance of 12 miles, he will very soon get fed up waiting. I do not think anyone could blame him for being inclined to burn the telephone with his comments.

Whatever about improving the trunk and cross-Channel services—I agree with that—we should not neglect to improve communications in the rural areas. I suppose it is much fairer and much better all round to give a specific example. I wrote to the Minister some time ago about delays in telephone calls between a place called Ballyforan in Roscommon and the surrounding towns. It is beyond contradiction that it takes three-quarters of an hour even to make contact between that village and Roscommon, 12 miles away. That state of affairs has obtained for longer than I care to remember—I shall put it that way—and I hope I shall not have to keep on remembering it, but that some attempt will be made in the near future to make available the extra lines needed to improve that service.

In that locality the Sugar Company has a scheme in operation. I found, to my misfortune, on a number of occasions when I wanted to make telephone calls, that I had to wait while that company stayed on the line for half an hour. There is just one line which has to service half the parish. So far as I can see, because they happen to be a quiet type of people in the locality—they are civilised, humble and patient—they will be left in the same position and have to suffer on patiently, unless someone speaks for them. I want the Minister to understand that the fact that I am speaking very mildly on this Estimate may be somewhat deceptive. If necessary at a later stage, I shall raise this matter on an Adjournment Debate when I shall deal specifically with the case of delays I have noted over a period of 12 months. I shall give the times concerned and the excuses put forward when the postmaster was queried on them.

I have often had occasion in Dublin to make telephone calls down the country and when I lifted the receiver and asked for "Long distance", I was often put on to "Cross-Channel". The idea in Dublin seems to be that if you ask for "Long distance", you are automatically and without delay put on to "Cross-Channel". It is desirable to have such efficiency, but I do not see why, if I want to ring some allegedly insignificant little village in rural Ireland, I should have to wait for perhaps three-quarters of an hour or an hour to get the call. The people in the rural areas deserve more consideration than to be left at the tail-end of the queue for any of these services which are being made available.

I appeal to the Minister to see that priority is given in the rural areas on this question of installation and to examine into the possibility of further reductions all round in telephone charges. Finally, I should like to assure him, as have other Deputies, that he will have the unanimous support of the House in any steps he takes to improve the conditions of sub-postmasters and their assistants in rural Ireland.

I want to take this opportunity of congratulating the Minister on the very good job he is doing as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. I have just a few points to make and I shall be brief. I understand there is great delay in dealing with applications for telephones from Malahide, Rush and Skerries. The Minister has assured me that trunk lines are being put into those areas and that very little can be done until these trunk lines are in use. I appeal to him to bear in mind the necessity for early connection in these areas. Other people there will then be encouraged to apply for connection. I was told recently that it would be six months before certain people in Malahide would get their telephones. The same applies to Rush and rural Skerries.

No doubt various Ministers for Posts and Telegraphs have received representations in regard to part-time postmen or perhaps I should say three-quarter time postmen in rural Ireland. We have a number of such men. They have no other employment. They are quasi-permanent in their area. When they reach what would normally be retiring age they get extension after extension until they are unable to carry on any longer. I trust the Minister will be able to do something on behalf of these men who have given long years of service and who, when they come to the end, although they have no other employment, must go out without any pension.

I know the rules are there. I know that a man must sit for an examination and, if he succeeds, is appointed. I would point out that the men for whom I plead have long years of practical experience and have given good and loyal service to the State. Various Ministers have been very sympathetic in regard to the problem of part-time postmen and have given them extended periods. Nevertheless, I should like the whole question to be re-examined with a view to seeing if anything can be done which will be of benefit to such men.

Deputy McQuillan spoke about the small sub-post offices throughout Ireland. It is indeed a big problem. I have found that, as a result of the small amount of money sub-postmistresses or sub-postmasters receive for doing the job, they cannot afford to pay an able assistant. Just as in the case of the part-time postman, this also is a big job. What can the Minister do about it? Can the State afford to do anything better?

A number of people have failed to carry out their work. That is due, largely, to the small amount of money the sub-postmistresses and sub-postmasters are getting. There, again, it is a financial consideration. If the Minister decides to meet the position the question arises of how much it will cost the country. Very often, Deputies agitate for post offices in their areas. That is especially true of Dublin where a number of new areas have been created. I have agitated quite often for sub-post offices and then, later, the people concerned say they are not getting enough and cannot afford to pay an assistant. Perhaps the State might be able to afford more central post offices and adequately-paid staff though I feel sure that from the financial point of view it would be prohibitive.

In a number of small areas it happens that the sub-postmasters or sub-postmistresses must answer telephone calls on their half-day. I am glad that that duty is to some extent becoming unnecessary by virtue of the installation of the automatic telephone. We all appreciate that advance and it is very noticeable in County Dublin.

From time to time there are complaints about the late delivery of letters in certain areas. I have often wondered whether it would be possible for postmen in rural areas to change their route on certain days so that the same area will not receive a late delivery all the time. In that way, the deliveries would be spread more equitably over the area of delivery. In certain County Dublin parishes the post is delivered at say one, two or three o'clock in the day. In the interests of fair play to all it might be possible for the postman to alternate his delivery routes so that the same area will not receive late delivery of post all the time.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share