asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he is aware that on the night of Sunday, 13th June 1976 all six coin boxes in Tullamore, County Offaly were out of order and that this is becoming a regular feature in the town; and if he will state the steps he is taking to avoid this inconvenience.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Telephone Services.
7.
The answer to the first part of the question is No. A fault report was received in respect of one kiosk only but three of the six were found to be out of order on the morning of 14th June owing to the coin slots being jammed. Most of the service difficulties with these kiosks are caused by the jamming of coin slots by bent coins or by being stuffed with paper or other material. All fault reports are dealt with on a priority basis. Special additional steps are difficult to envisage in the circumstances.
Is it not a fact that the twopenny slot in these machines is in some way defective; that it is not merely confined to this instance but is a general problem all over the country?
I am afraid I cannot accept an extension of this question which deals with the coin boxes in Tullamore.
I am asking whether or not, in this particular instance, where all the coin slots were jammed, the defect is inherent in the mechanism.
I am not allowing a widening of the question.
I am not so informed.
Might I ask the Minister if he has yet considered adjusting the coin boxes in public telephone booths to accept a tenpenny piece, as the necessity to insert large numbers of fivepenny pieces is a grave inconvenience to the public and is causing unnecessary over-use of the machinery?
The point raised by the Deputy is under consideration.
Question No. 8.
Two questions were skipped.
I stated that they were postponed.
At the request of?
At the request, I am sure, of the Deputies concerned. My office has been informed that they were postponed.
I was not informed of that but I accept that one of the Deputies requested it.
Question No. 8.
8.
Mr. Kitt
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the total number of applications for telephone service in County Galway; the average waiting period; and how soon it is hoped that connections will be made.
About 1,620, with an average waiting period of about 16 months. It is hoped to attend to about 500 of these by the end of this year and most of the balance next year.
Mr. Kitt
Is the Minister aware that, in certain cases, the delay is much more than 16 months? Might I ask, in the majority of cases referred to where there are long delays, what is the reason? Has his Department any proposals for expediting the installation of telephones for these applicants?
The average waiting time for County Galway is, unfortunately, somewhat higher than for the country as a whole. The reason for this is attributable mainly to a high proportion of extensive line work applications with a consequential relatively slow rate of clearance, this being, I am afraid, inherent in the nature of the terrain of part of the county.
I cannot accept that 16 months is an average waiting period. The Minister receives more letters from me about telephones in County Galway than from anybody else. I know that some applicants must wait two, three, or four years.
I am awaiting a question, Deputy.
It is relevant to the question Deputy Kitt asked.
The Deputy must put it in the form of a supplementary question.
Might I ask the Minister if he has himself admitted that there seems to be a longer waiting period in County Galway than in any other county? He has given a reason. I would ask him to remedy that situation and give some telephones to County Galway. I said before, he is a very decent man about answering letters but telephones are required.
I agree with the Deputy that the installation of telephones is more important than answering letters. But I should like to draw his attention to the fact that the number of connections in the county in 1972 was 850 and in 1975, 1,650—that is in Galway. That is to say, the rate of connection has almost doubled. On the whole that is a fairly satisfactory improvement over the position as it was when this Government took Office.
Question No. 9.
Would the Minister agree that the increase in connections to which he referred is a direct consequence of the investment made prior to his taking Office as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs?
I certainly would not so agree. The investment rate in question was very far below that rate of investment which was brought into being when this Government took Office and since then. If the Deputy would care to put down a question about relative rates of investment I would be very happy to answer it.
Question No. 9.
May we take it that the Minister accepts full responsibility for the present state of the telephone service having regard to the fact that, according to himself, the connection rate now depends on what was done by the present Government and not the previous one?
We are getting away from the question in respect of County Galway.
We are getting back to the question answered by the Minister.
Question No. 9.
9.
(Dublin Central) asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the total amount of money collected from private telephones for the years 1973, 1974 and 1975.
The amounts collected in respect of all rented telephones were as follows:—
|
1973 |
£23,298,000 |
|
1974 |
£31,497,000 |
|
1975 |
£36,654,000 |
10.
(Dublin Central) asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the total amount of money collected from coin box telephones for the years 1973, 1974 and 1975.
The amounts collected from telephone kiosks and public call offices in Post Offices were as follows:—
|
1973 |
£1,110,000; |
|
1974 |
£1,316,000; |
|
1975 |
£1,579,000 (estimated) |