Like Deputy Begley I should like to wish the Minister well in his onerous task. He has the ability to at least display a courteous attitude. I think he discovered a long time ago that a smile gets one further in this House than a scowl. If some of the Ministers who sat where he is sitting had learned that lesson earlier they might still be Ministers of the Government.
I was appalled by part of the contents of Deputy Dowling's speech. I regret he is not here because I do not like speaking about somebody when he is not present. I will stay within the rules of order, but, with your permission, Sir, I should like to describe his statement that confidential information given to a member of the Labour Party was transmitted to somebody before the "Seven Days" money lending programme as entirely untrue. I would be much stronger if the rules of the House would allow me. It is typical of the stuff we hear from people like Deputy Dowling who apparently have no regard for either the characters of their opponents or, as some of their colleagues in the party have discovered, the characters of their colleagues either when it comes to a thing like this. It is appalling that this sort of nonsense should be allowed in the House. I protested to the Chair at the time and he said that, unfortunately, he could not do anything about it. It was unfortunate he could do nothing about it. The only reason for raising a matter like this was to interfere with and blacken some Deputy of the Labour Party. If Deputy Dowling had the information which he claimed he had, the least he should have done was name the person to whom he was referring. He had not even got the decency to do that. There is no feeling of guilt in this party. We do not do things like that. We do not stab people in the backs. If somebody comes to us with a confidential complaint it is dealt with in the strictest confidence.
Deputy Dowling's reference to the fact that an inquiry was requested by the Labour Party is quite true. I should like, though, to quote the whole of the comment which Deputy Desmond made at column 1570 of the Official Report, volume 242, No. 9, of 20th November, 1969, which Deputy Dowling was anxious to have on the record of the House. I quote:
I, too, gave notice of such questions both to the Taoiseach and to the Minister for Justice. I did this in view of the very serious implications contained in the Minister's statement which if true, mean either the integrity of the staff concerned is in question or they are unfit for their posts. Alternatively, if the Minister's allegations are untrue, we should have his resignation in this House. I further asked the Taoiseach if the allegations made by the Minister for Justice were untrue.
Subsequently the Minister for Justice was requested by the Taoiseach to tender his resignation and we can draw our own conclusions. I do not want to go any further with that.
With regard to Radio Telefís Éireann it is rather unfortunate that we are not in the position to pour very much more money into our broadcasting system. If we could do that we would, I am sure, have better programmes than those being produced across the channel where there is a tremendous amount of money being spent. I am one of the people who have been referred to here as being lucky enough to be able to get four or five stations for the price of one licence. I find myself spending most of my free time looking at Telefís Éireann. That speaks for itself. The standard of RTE programmes is really very high. We get a lot of trash from the other stations. We get trash from Telefís Éireann, too, occasionally. I agree with one thing Deputy Dowling said—there is far too much violence shown. They should stop showing the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis altogether because it is corrupting the children of the country to show violence like that.
Telefís Éireann, by and large, try to give as good a cross section of the entertainment which they think the people of the country want as is possible. Their sports programmes are excellent. A number of the programmes of general knowledge which they have been doing are enjoyed by young and old. I, like some other speakers, think they do not give enough time to traditional Irish music. I am unashamedly a fan, and I have always been, of Irish music and dancing. They could do a lot more of this and it would be accepted as good viewing. Unfortunately, we have I suppose on the board of Radio Telefís Éireann, as in this House and elsewhere, people who feel that while one is proving himself a great Irishman by speaking Irish on every possible occasion one does not have to show any interest in Irish culture after that. Irish dancing, Irish music and Irish games are just as important and more important in many cases than the Irish language. I wish many people would realise that. I hope Telefís Éireann will give more time to this type of programme. If they do, there will not be many complaints. There are people who would like to see the programme they like being shown all the time. Some of my neighbours with small children would look all the time at cartoons. I have other neighbours whose teenage sons and daughters cannot understand why there is not pop music all the time. Those of us who are older can see that people are entitled to balanced viewing. That is all we ask.
Newscasting is usually good. One thing irritates me and it is if I get the news headlines at 7.30 in the morning, the news in full at eight o'clock, again at nine and right through the day hear the same piece of news repeated again and again, even though that piece of news would be of very little interest to most people. I am only expressing a personal opinion now. Also, in regard to the preference that is given to foreign news, I believe that many people would prefer to be told about something that had happened here at home rather than to listen to a detailed report on, perhaps, some discussions which took place between two African chiefs or something that was said by an American Senator. While these matters may be of great importance in the countries concerned, they are usually of very little importance to us. Again, I am expressing a personal opinion but I think that a brief reference to such matters would be sufficient. I must say at this point that our news readers are excellent.
A number of speakers have referred to the cost of television licences and the question has been raised as to whether the cost is too high or too low. However, it is ridiculous for anybody in this House to quote—as Deputy Dowling attempted to do—from something that was said in the other House on this matter. There are enough representatives there of all parties to deal with the problem. We have enough problems of our own here. Those people in certain parts of the country who can get only poor reception have cause for complaint, but I do not think that those in areas where reception is good, even if it be from our own station only, have any cause for complaint. There are places in which several stations can be received quite easily, but I am sure if the people in those areas were asked to pay more they would complain, because they relate the licence fee to RTE and not to the other stations, and rightly so. There are a number of areas in the country where, apparently, there is interference from the Irish station on some other stations. At one time some people thought that this was being done deliberately. I do not think it is, but it should be prevented.
Even if it would cost more money, an attempt should be made to beam the Irish television and radio programmes across the Border. What is the point in talking about what we would like to see done in the North or about talking about our way of life if we cannot put these facts to the people in their homes? Radio and television provide us with the opportunity of doing this and I do not believe that many people would complain about any expenditure on this. Of course, I do not mean that we should make any attempt at brainwashing because that could not be done. Because of actions both north and south of the Border there is sometimes grave reason for doubt as to the civilisation of some people. However, in the main, we are a civilised race and it would be of help if our programmes could be beamed across the Border in such a way as would ensure good reception for those who wished to know of our way of life. Somebody mentioned here that Mr. Paisley won his election because of the publicity he got on RTE. Of course, that is nonsense, because Telefís Éireann programmes cannot be received much further north than Dundalk. Therefore, there is no point in anyone speaking that sort of nonsense.
We could have more discussions on Telefís Éireann. I do not mean one-sided discussions. I regret that the political discussions which were featured over a number of years have been dropped. It is my personal opinion that one person from a political party can do much better on a television programme against two or three from the other side. During the years we have heard politicians from the same party contradict each other in an attempt to score their own petty points whereas one person can keep the one line. I would suggest to the Minister that he might endeavour to have such discussions again on television as we had on a one, one, one basis. Current affairs should be discussed on these programmes because there are people who believe that politicians talk a peculiar type of language in the House—a language that is not generally understood. Maybe we, ourselves, have created that myth, so I would suggest that important matters are discussed on television at the time they are happening. I agree entirely with those Deputies, including Deputy Dowling, when they say that there is a tendency on the part of Telefís Éireann to pick on something hardly worth talking about, to blow it up to a matter of major importance and attempt to create dialogue on it. This should not happen. All of us are mature enough to discuss matters which are of importance to the country.
The question of Common Market entry is one which could not be over-discussed on television. The Government must be prepared to tell the country both the good and the bad points of membership and Telefís Éireann is the medium by which they should do this. They should not be afraid to meet representatives of the other parties and answer any questions they might be asked.
It would appear that some people forget there are still many people who use radio. There are many people who still prefer a radio in their home and there are also those who cannot yet afford to have television or who may have no electricity supply. There are also others, like myself, who travel a lot, particularly at night, and who listen often to radio. To get back to the question of licence fees, I would advocate the abolition of additional radio licences for various types of radios. If a person holds a receiving licence, that licence should cover whatever type of apparatus he may have. I believe that the law in relation to licences for radios for motor cars is honoured more in the breach than in the observance. In any case, most people who have a radio in their car hold a licence for a radio or a television in their homes.
I would agree that those people who do not hold a licence for either their radio or television set should not be allowed go free. The tendency to give them what might be described as a humorous warning only gives them the idea that they are like the poacher of long ago who considered that he was doing something that was funny. What they are doing, in fact, is preventing people who are prepared to pay for the service from getting a licence at a reasonable cost because, if television and radio licences have to be increased, the blame must rest on those thousands upon thousands who have never taken out a licence in their lives. I have great sympathy with those who cannot afford to do so, but the old age pensioners do not have to worry about radio licences and neither do the blind. There are, however, thousands who think it is funny not to take out a licence. They should not be allowed to get away with this.
A greater effort should be made to encourage piped television. The hundreds of aerials that one sees in every village, town and city do nothing to improve the landscape. Something should be done. The firms involved in the manufacture or sale of television sets should offer a prize to anyone who creates a small aerial. I believe it will come; I believe the day will come when an aerial no bigger than one's finger will be produced. An effort should be made to produce it quickly. In the meantime piped television should be allowed to take as many stations as possible into as many homes as possible.
UTV do an excellent job with Irish music and dancing and the Irish programmes they produce are a credit to the station. We might do worse than follow their example in RTE.
I have a number of thorny queries I should like to put to the Minister. I have a letter here from a gentleman who tells me he had 44½ years service with the Post Office and he wants to know if the Minister will talk to the Minister for Finance about getting something done to improve the pensions of those who retired from the Post Office some years ago and who are trying to exist on very small pensions. This is a fair query. Someone who has given that length of service should be entitled to more than a few paltry shillings. Had this man been born 20 years later he would probably have twice the pension he is getting now.
The gratuity paid to auxiliary part-time postmen is an improvement. Credit where credit is due: it is an improvement on the days when they got nothing at all. Nevertheless an effort should be made to give these people a pension. It is too bad that they should have to depend on whatever old age pension they get and the charity of their children, or of their neighbours, as sometimes happens.
The Post Office Workers Union has negotiated with the Department and relations are reasonably good. I do not want to cut across anything they are doing. There is, however, one anachronism to which I should like to refer. The man who is appointed to the smaller post gets the lowest rate and he works for a number of years before he gets the full rate. Even then his wages are low and as soon as he gets an offer of a better job he moves out. It is extremely difficult to get anybody to replace him because no one wants to start at such a very low wage. There are areas where ladies sometimes act as postwomen for a while, get fed up and chuck the job. Children just out of school do it for a while and give it up. An effort should be made to make the job a decent one. It should be motorised if necessary to ensure that it is done properly. A decent basic wage is the first requirement. Apart from the fact that it is an onerous job it is also very hard on people awaiting the delivery of their mail. Sometimes the mail is incorrectly delivered because the postman does not know the area. It is, perhaps, a minor matter, but it is something in which the Post Office might take more interest.
I raised a matter here a couple of years ago and it was just left hanging. To show how important it is I have again been requested to raise it. It is a matter relating to Sligo post office. About two years ago a district justice tried a member of the post office staff who had stolen some postal packets and he made a statement which, I think, should never have been made. Justice Barry said that he could do no more than record a conviction against the defendant and he suspended the sentence on condition that the defendant kept the peace for a period of two years. He also said that he was giving warning that, in the event of his finding anything wrong in the post office in future, he would send the staff to jail. Can anybody imagine the sheer audacity of a district justice warning decent people, simply because there happened to be one thief, that he would send them to jail? This should have been taken up by the Post Office authorities at the time and I have now been asked to raise it again because the staff regard Justice Barry's remarks as a grave reflection on their integrity and to the general public the statement seems to imply that dishonesty is rife in Sligo post office. The allegations were unjust and unwarranted and an abuse of the high office he holds. The justice should be told that, because one person in an office is dishonest, that is no reason for him to make allegations against decent, hardworking staff like the staff in Sligo post office.
Loughrea telephone exchange is pretty close to Tynagh and, because of the activities there, trunk and local calls have increased considerably. Plans were on hands some time ago to rectify the very bad telephone service there, but local people claim it is the telephonists who are at fault. What can one do when ten times the volume of phone calls come through than the system is able to handle? There are very limited facilities in the office and complaints have been made of delays of over an hour. Now, it is quite possible that arrangements may be made eventually for having automatic working there but until that happens I would ask the Minister to have some temporary arrangement made which will allow these people to discharge their duties better than they can at present. It is no fault of the telephonists. With industries such as you have there and with the tourist pressures on the telephone system maybe the Minister might consider routing the calls to that area through some other exchange, if that would be possible. Take them away from Galway anyway. If this could be done it could relieve the pressure. It is bad now but what it is likely to be in summer when all the tourists will be using the lines is hard to imagine. Some effort should be made to deal with this matter before that time comes.
The five-day week for postmen has been put into operation in some places. Last year I raised the question of the abolition of Saturday deliveries and some progress has been made since then. The Minister said at the time that this was being done. Postmen must be the most patient body of workers in the country because in relation to their numbers and the manner in which they are spread over every town and village they have just been left there. Everybody else is important but it appears that they are not. There are people who say there should not be a five-day week for postal services but the extraordinary thing is that most of the clamour comes from people who themselves have a five-day week. I have no sympathy with people like that who have their Saturday off but feel that postmen should not have it off. The postmen have shown a sense of responsibility but the Department should not take advantage of that and leave them without doing something about it. I hope that this year we will see the end of this problem in regard to the five-day week.
I read recently that a firm of consultants were carrying out some kind of Gallup poll in relation to Saturday deliveries but I can tell the Minister, without any poll, that the public, apart from the few I have mentioned, would be prepared to do without Saturday deliveries. Most of us would be glad if we did not get any letters on Saturday. The postmen, who seldom work off their impatience by doing anything out of the way, should get the Saturday off concession which they so richly deserve as a measure of relief for their neverending and irregular morning duties.
Another thing which could possibly solve this problem is a different plan for posting arrangements. Perhaps the Minister could get in touch with his colleagues about this. It seems to be a must in most business places from which a lot of correspondence goes out that all the letters should be held until 5 o'clock in the evening and all posted at the one time. Very often half of the correspondence could be posted at lunch time. Worse than that, there seems to be the idea that the proper time to post the greatest volume of correspondence is on a Thursday evening or a Friday evening. I do not know why this is so, and a campaign should be started to try to have the posting of letters and parcels done at irregular times during the day. If at all possible some should be posted before lunch. If this were done it would lead to smoother sorting and a faster and more accurate delivery service. Thursday could be used instead of Friday for posting a lot of correspondence in Departments in which they have got into the habit of working late on Fridays.
The Minister might also get in touch with the Minister for Social Welfare in regard to issuing money at week-ends and try to have these letters sent out on Thursdays because this causes one of the greatest hold-ups. These must be sorted and must be delivered and why not send them out on Thursdays? Friday is now the general shopping day and recipients of this money would be only too glad to have it a day earlier. Some planning in this direction would do a lot of good.
Another matter which has been raised here, not alone during the life-time of this Government but back down the years—and every time the matter is raised we are told the solution is just around the corner—is in regard to the civil rights of postal workers. A man who climbs an ESB pole is entitled to belong to a political party and to express his political views but a man who climbs a telephone pole is not; the man who delivers letters is not entitled to belong to a political party. Post Office staff are debarred from being members of political parties. They cannot stand for election and if they do succeed in standing for election, as some of my colleagues have learned, they are told, and the Minister is aware of this, that they must resign or become independents; they must leave the political party. Of course, some of them do not and the people concerned are sensible enough not to take any action against them.
We appreciate this, but is there any reason why a teacher who is dealing directly with the minds of grown up children can not alone be a politician but can stand for this House while a postman cannot? Where does the catch come in? I do not suggest that senior officials who might be dealing with confidential documents in the Minister's Department should be entirely free although some people believe that they should be. If I had my way I would give free rights to all of them because I am aware of senior officials in other Departments who apparently find no difficulty in being politicians, or at least they speak at election meetings even if they do not use their own names, from time to time. The Minister should at least extend this right to the Post Office staff. It has been granted to a similar type of worker all over the world. If there is some reason of which the Minister is aware why they should not be allowed this civil right he should let us know. God knows we have been talking about this for long enough in this House and outside it and it is about time it was brought to a head. I am not blaming the Government completely because we had a Government some years ago which we supported and they definitely should have done something about this but they did not. I can assure the Minister that if he does not do it it will be done the next time.
I read recently in a union journal about the setting up of local consultative councils to which the Minister has referred. These seem to embody new grievance procedures and an easing up of old disciplinary measures. I should like to compliment the Minister and his Department on this fresh approach to the matter. There seems to be imaginative developments in it and it will be a great help in improving relationships which badly need improving in many cases.
It is generally recognised that the ordinary worker on the floor should have a direct approach to his immediate superior officer. There is a danger that the immediate superior officer, busy with pressing administrative problems, may get divorced from the aspirations and legitimate grievances of rank and file workers. The setting up of these councils should at least ensure that they are tuned in on how the workers think and how the workers believe improvements can be effected. It is generally recognised that nothing is lost by listening to the workers' views, and even if they are not acted upon, they very often make points which would otherwise be lost or over-looked. I honestly believe if they were listened to more often there would be less industrial unrest.
I had an experience, which I hope to refer to during Private Members' Time, recently when attempting to negotiate with the representative of a semi-State body, who was the rudest individual I have ever met. The biggest objection he had to negotiating with me was the fact that he read the Dáil Debates. I told him he reminded me of the William Martin Murphy type of negotiator and this apparently gave him the right to be rude not only to me but to my colleagues as well.
I am not suggesting that this is true in the Post Office or that it is generally accepted in the country but there is a danger that those who get up to a certain level in the hierarchy of a particular government Department or local authority feel they are superior to those lower down the line. It boosts their ego to try to belittle and bemean those at a lower level.
The Minister's idea will be a good start if it is done properly. I hope the people on whose lot it will fall to work the new machinery will not carry on as if they were in their old entrenched positions because this would bring about a situation in which the cure is worse than the disease. This is the real danger. There is no point in saying: "We will talk to you" if the attitude which this "gentleman" adopted is accepted.
The Minister would be well advised to take a personal interest in the running of these councils. He should ensure that the councils are made work. Local supervising officers should clearly understand the stated intentions of those who drew up the scheme. If this development works satisfactorily the Minister may have started something which could very easily be copied in industry and help to bring about peace in the very difficult situation we find ourselves in at the present time. Perhaps the Minister will tell the House when it is proposed to introduce these councils in all areas. Certainly, that information would be of considerable assistance to us.
Can anything be done to help staff about income tax payments in respect of unforeseen overtime in particular? Overtime has to be worked in the Post Office at Christmas and other pressure periods. In many cases the result is in the following year when overtime may be less and family circumstances may be more difficult, the staff find themselves having to meet large bills with reduced earnings. I am sure the Minister and the Revenue Commissioners should be able to devise some scheme which would help to reduce the difficulty. I can never understand why PAYE does not apply to Government Departments. There may be a reason for it, but I do not know what it is. Because of the system which is operated at present the unfortunate official who drew overtime will find, even though he is on the basic rate, that he has been stopped for last year and it is gone with the wind. I hope the Minister will be able to do something about this.
The Minister might look at the question of union representatives participating in deliberations on international postal bodies. Recognition for the postal trade union movement is being sought by the International Postal Trade Union movement and it cannot be denied that personal experience must have a very big contribution to make. I gather from reading postal journals that such a move is being opposed by some postal administrators, including our own. In view of the fact that we hear so much about joint consulation and worker/employer relationships and so much newspaper space, television and parliamentary time are taken up discussing these matters it is almost unbelievable that Ireland, where we hear so much about freedom, lines up with administrations opposed to such a development. I notice the West Germans support the proposal, which is certainly food for thought. If the Germans with their supposed rigidity and discipline are democratic enough to accede to joint consultation of this type, surely the Irish postal administration will lose nothing and gain much by harnessing the talents not alone of the administrators but also of the workers and their representatives as well. I beg the Minister to give full consideration to the suggestion. It may be a little out of the way, but he is a young man with ideas and if he looks into it he will find there is a great deal to be said for it. It would be an excellent example to set.
The introduction of standard time has created many problems for postmen. Streets are poorly lit and they have not been provided with the proper types of lamps for this work. Has the Department given consideration to the provision of suitable lamps or could a later schedule of deliveries be arranged for postal deliveries in the winter? If, of course, we are going back to Greenwich mean time, some of the problems will be solved but letters will still have to be delivered in the dark. In view of the difficulties created by standard time if the Department allowed postmen to come in later in the winter, that part of the problem would be solved. I see no need for postmen to have to struggle with bundles of letters and string in dark, wet, wintry mornings. The extra hour would make some difference. Would the Minister at least ensure that a proper type of lamp is issued so that they can see where they are going? An argument in favour of starting the first delivery a little later is the fact that offices and shops are not opened very early.
In new housing schemes it is considered to be the in thing to have the letter box at the bottom of the door. I wonder how a designer's back would stand up to the strain of having to stoop down to 400 or 500 letter boxes in order to put letters in them? In addition, there do not appear to be any regulations with regard to sharp edges. It is not unusual for a postman to put his hand in a letter box and on taking it out find he has left a portion of his finger inside it.
In Britain the Minister responsible for post offices took the matter in hand and he travelled around with a postman on his city delivery.
