asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he is aware of public annoyance in Dublin regarding the marked disimprovement in postal services at Christmas, 1974; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin Postal Services.
51.
I am not so aware. The quality of postal service in Dublin during the Christmas pressure period was satisfactory and was well up to the standard of previous years. If the Deputy can supply details of specific cases of delay, I will have them investigated immediately.
If what the Minister says is true, his constituency must have got a better service than mine. I can supply evidence of people who got the bulk of their Christmas cards two days after Christmas. They had only one service on Christmas Eve, where formerly they had three deliveries.
I am not replying on behalf of my constituents but on behalf of the Department for which I am responsible. The estimate of how the service this year compared with previous years is compiled by my officials from their experience not only of this year but of previous years. As I said, if I receive evidence of shortcomings I shall certainly look into them. It is, of course, the case that many of us received Christmas cards after Christmas because many of us, including myself, sometimes post our cards so late that they could not be received before Christmas.
As a public representative for a constituency, has the Minister received any complaints?
I have received no complaints as Minister, as Deputy or in any other capacity. My Department also informed me that no complaints have been received either in the Dublin postal district or at headquarters regarding the standard of the service in Dublin.
52.
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the number of additional workers recruited for the Christmas postal services in Dublin in 1974.
1,461.
How does that compare with the figure employed last year?
Last year 1,532 were employed, a decline of 5 per cent.
Was there a decline this year in the number?
Yes, there was a small decline.
Does the Minister accept that the smaller number this year were able to provide a better service than the greater number last year?
I did not say a better service this year. I said that the service was well up to the standard of previous years.
If we accept it was adequate, there must have been too many employed last year.
No, the volume was down this year.
Would the Minister accept it is unfortunate that having paid more for a service we are getting less and that on his own admission the volume is down? Maybe it would be better to charge less for the service.
This is an argument, not a question.
Is it not true that former Parliamentary Secretaries and Ministers circulated to their constituents Christmas cards at the State's expense? Is that not the reason why the volume is down?
That has nothing to do with the question. Question No. 53.
(Interruptions.)
Deputies must allow Questions to proceed.