asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if, in view of the universal agreement on the gross inefficiency of our telephone system, he will state the plans there are for its rapid improvement.
21.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Telephone Service.
20.
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (a) the projections for provision of an overall adequate and efficient telephone system throughout the State and (b) the immediate interim steps he proposes to take to bring about essential improvements in the system.
I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 20 and 21 together.
I regret that the standard of telephone service is much below what it should be. It has been seriously affected since the strike earlier this year by members of the Irish Post Office Engineering Union. When the strike ended there was a substantial backlog of maintenance work to be overtaken. Despite the working of a substantial volume of overtime and the diversion to maintenance work of staff who would otherwise have been engaged in developing the telephone system, the service is still not back to normal.
With full staff co-operation, which I have been striving to achieve, I would hope that it would be possible to improve the existing quality of service quickly and to make progress in carrying out the programme of improvements envisaged when the 1977 Telephone Capital Bill was introduced. That programme was designed to improve the quality of service, to increase greatly the annual rate of connection of new lines and to raise the percentage of automatic telephones.
Surely the Minister will agree that the problem is a long standing one, that it existed long before the strike, and can he say whether it is due to the decision taken by his predecessor or is it because the system has been under-capitalised and that we have not planned to improve the telephone side? Does he think a Government Department are too rigid or that there should be some sort of semi-State company established to look after this matter?
As the Deputy has said, this is a long standing problem. The reorganisation claim was first made in 1972. I inherited the problem, I inherited the strike, but it goes back much farther than that. One could say there were problems on both sides. Since I became Minister I have done everything I possibly could to achieve better industrial relations with this union. I have set up a number of committees chaired by a mediator nominated by the chairman of the Labour Court to try to settle a number of differences between the Department and the union. In a way, I suppose, I should not say the Department and the union because all of us belong to the Department.
There has been a considerable amount of criticism in relation to rules and regulations and staff-management relations. To deal with this I set up a body chaired by a mediator nominated by the chairman of the Labour Court to ensure an impartial review and, as I said the other night, to bring an outside view to bear on the problem. I set up a mediation committee, also under the chairmanship of a Labour Court mediator, to issue recommendations on grievances that could not be settled in direct union-departmental negotiations. Indeed quite a number of problems have come before that body and have been settled.
I met the national executives of the main unions and discussed a variety of problems with them. I arranged for a very substantial strengthening of the staff on personnel work both at headquarters and at district level. I found that the numbers involved on personnel work in the Department were grossly inadequate and I have strengthened them considerably. As the House is aware, I set up a review group under Dr. Michael Dargan to examine the feasibility of giving autonomy to the telecommunications services and proposals will be put forward by them in that respect.
In accordance with the ICTU recommendations for the settlement of the strike, the IPOEU undertook that their members would extend their full co-operation in the speedy restoration of all services, subject to appropriate consultation. When they undertook this, I instructed that all overtime that the staff were willing to perform, and which would lead to improved services for the public, should be worked. Since May last the total of £2.7 million has been paid in overtime to the engineering staff.
What I have been saying is that I have done everything possible to try to improve relations with the union, and I can assure Deputies that I will continue to try to improve staff relations.
In relation to Dr. Dargan's brief, does a question arise of hiving the service off to private enterprise or to a semi-State company?
I have left it completely open.
He can do whatever he likes?
He can recommend whatever he likes. That is a different matter, because the Government will make the decisions.
Arising from the Minister's reply and his very long statement, which is of considerable interest to all of us throughout the country, has any long term projection been made on the basis of the technical quality of our whole telecommunications system? Are we on a firm foundation on which to build a proper service for the future even if everything is going 100 per cent on the staff side, the capital side and all the rest of it? Are we technically right?
I believe we are on a sound foundation. Of course that does not mean to say that everything is perfect in so far as equipment is concerned, but in the main the equipment is good and I believe we are on a sound foundation for future progress. I hope we will establish good relations with the unions, and in such circumstances, since we are providing the capital, we will be able to provide a worthwhile service.
Will the Minister tell me whether large scale replenishment of the old technical basis of our system has taken place in the last 20 years? I will ask him further whether 20 years ago it was held that the systems—we had three of them so far as I can remember—were all obsolete, even those that we were planning to instal at the time. I suggest there are in the records, without disclosing anything that should not be disclosed, proposals to the Government, as long ago as 21 years, to scrap the whole lot, to rebuild the thing from the start and that otherwise we would not have a proper service. Quite honestly, from the looks of it I do not think we ever will, with all the goodwill in the world on the part of the staff and the Minister.
I do not accept what the Deputy has said.
They must have changed their minds since.
The Deputy can see for himself in Letterkenny that very considerable improvements are being effected.
It is non-existent.
The Deputy knows perfectly well what I am referring to—the new exchange.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Arising out of the Minister's reference to the strike in the early part of the year, is the strike or the go slow over, and are the staff now working normally? I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that as recently as last week it took from 4.30 p.m. until 5.45 p.m. to get through to the trunk operator on the “10” number, notwithstanding the fact that the number was ringing all the time. To me that suggests that there is a go-slow or abnormal working conditions. Am I correct in that?
As I pointed out to the House some time earlier, quite a number of circuits are still out of order——
(Cavan-Monaghan): I was trying to phone from this House.
The fact that a number of circuits are not in operation is one of the basic problems. It is not the operator's fault and I want to make that clear. In fact, I should like to take this opportunity of commending the operators on the exceptional work they have been doing in very difficult circumstances. As an aftermath of the strike sufficient circuits are not in operation. As I mentioned earlier, I have been doing everything possible in the matter. Since last May we have provided overtime to the extent of £2,700,000 in an endeavour to get the service back. I am, of course, not at all satisfied yet.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Does the Minister realise that the time I mentioned, an hour-and-a-quarter, represents one-eighth of the working day spent on trying to get one telephone call?
It is a day's work to get three trunk calls.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Does the Minister not accept that this is an enormous waste of time and energy?