asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs why his Department failed to give satisfactory service to the subscriber concerned in respect of temporary telephone number 971749 in September and October 1968; why on numerous occasions the instrument failed to engage when dialled; why persons phoning that number were unable to contact it; and why his Department failed to repair promptly and effectively all defects reported to them.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unsatisfactory Telephone Service.
18.
Numerous tests on various dates did not reveal any fault in the telephone 971749. Persons phoning this number may have been unable to obtain an answer because the premises were unattended for periods. All complaints received were attended to promptly by the Department but difficulty was experienced in gaining access to the premises on several occasions.
Could the Minister say why it was that on numerous occasions when people dialled on the instrument in question they were unable to engage any number because, no matter how many digits were dialled, the dialling tone was still the only sound that could be heard on the instrument?
I do not want to read a complete diary of the events that took place because it would take too long, but the Deputy can be assured there were a great many examinations of this telephone on a considerable number of occasions. No one replied to it when it rang and, on a particular occasion, someone was contacted but he said he was not aware of any trouble other than the fault of the bell on 26th September, which fault was attended to on the same day, and the same individual indicated he did not have any definite hours of attendance. The Deputy can, I think, be assured that we did everything we possibly could in this matter.
Is the Minister aware that during hours when the premises were attended and when the phone number in question was dialled from outside no sound at all was heard on the instrument and that was the experience of several people who were in attendance there? That is a fact to which I can testify.
I can give the Deputy the reports of our maintenance men who, as I said, did examine this repeatedly, if the Deputy would like to inquire at the Department, or I can send him a list of the occasions.
The Minister knows it was not until a couple of rows took place that the instrument was put right.
I have no such information.
This was, of course, a Fine Gael Referendum committee room. That had nothing to do with it, I suppose?
The Deputy knows very well that had nothing to do with it.
Over £20 was paid and there was not tuppence worth of service given.
No complaints were received from other election rooms on this occasion or on the occasion of the 1965 General Election. There has never been a suggestion of discrimination of that kind and the Deputy knows that very well.
It worked on this occasion.