Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 Mar 1983

Vol. 341 No. 5

Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited (Amendment) Bill, 1983: Second Stage .

Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Donnellan)

: I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am grateful to the Opposition for agreeing to take all Stages of this Bill today. The circulation of the Bill was, in fact, approved by my predecessor and I am happy to bring it before the House.

The sole purpose of this short Bill is to raise from £350 million to £600 million the limit on the borrowings and leasing arrangements of Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited which the Minister for Finance may guarantee.

The present limit was fixed by section 6 of the Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited Act, 1981, and is now nearing exhaustion. However, the company will have to raise nearly £200 million in 1983 in new borrowings and leasing arrangements to help finance the national telecommunications development programme this year. Early enactment of the Bill is, therefore, essential to the financing of telecommunications development in 1983.

Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited — ITI for short — is a wholly-owned State company which was set up by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs on 1 April 1981 to obtain funds from the private sector, either by borrowing or leasing, to help finance the telecommunications development programme. This is in furtherance of the policy of encouraging private participation in investment in infrastructural services with a view to reducing the central Government borrowing requirement.

The company is statutorily controlled by the Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited Act, 1981, which is broadly on the same lines as legislation governing other State-owned companies. Thus, for example, all borrowing and leasing arrangements by the company require the prior consent of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs given with the approval of the Minister for Finance.

The Act also contains an extra provision which requires the company to meet its costs from its operations in order to preclude any Exchequer subvention.

The limit of £350 million on ministerial guarantees under the 1981 Act was determined on the basis that it would be adequate to meet likely needs to 1982. It was hoped that by that time a State-sponsored body would have been established to take over the operation of the telecommunications services from the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, the intention being that ITI would become a subsidiary of that body, which would be wholly responsible for arranging the financing of telecommunications development.

In the event, the setting-up of the new statutory body, Board Telecom Éireann, was delayed. As Deputies will be aware, the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982, which was designed to establish the two new State-sponsored bodies to run the postal and telecommunications services, passed Second Stage last year but its progress was interrupted by the ending of the 23rd Dáil. The Government are, however, committed to pressing ahead with the reorganisation of the Department into State-sponsored bodies and I will be putting a motion to the House shortly after Easter proposing the restoration of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982, to the Order Paper for its Committee Stage.

Capital expenditure on telecommunications development was roughly £220 million in each of the years 1981 and 1982. Of this, the amounts raised by ITI were £92 million in 1981 and £141 million in 1982 — the Exchequer directly financed the balance. The capital programme for 1983 has been set at £226 million and, of this, £194 million will be financed by means of leasing arrangements with ITI, which will in turn finance the leases by means of borrowings or other arrangements.

The object of the Bill is, as I have said, to help in financing telecommunications development. The basic target of the development programme is to provide telecommunications services here of the standard available in our EEC partner countries in terms of quality and availability. To achieve this involves greatly improving the quality of the internal trunk service, giving all users an automatic service and extending the areas to which calls can be dialled. It also involves eliminating delays in meeting applications for telephone, telex and data facilities.

The current programme covers the five-year period 1980 to 1984, inclusive. I should say that it was acknowledged when the programme was undertaken, both by independent experts and by the Department itself, that meeting the programme targets in five years would be a remarkable achievement. I repeat this point, which my predecessors in office also stressed, because of the uninformed, although quite understandable, criticisms made from time to time that, despite the heavy investment that has taken place, the service has not been transformed. It must be remembered that the first essential has been to build up the infrastructure of the service itself in terms of buildings, exchanges, trunk systems and main cabling and this necessarily takes time. Dramatic breakthroughs over short periods were never, therefore, to be expected, nor were they promised.

But substantial progress has been made and this will be greatly accelerated this year and next year. For instance, the major digital trunk exchanges which the Minister opened in Dublin last week will provide greatly increased capacity for switching of trunk calls in Dublin exchanges and will enable many more trunk circuits to be provided to centres throughout the country which are still suffering congestion. Trunk exchanges will also be opened this year at Limerick, Waterford, Galway, Sligo, Drogheda and Dundalk. Overall, the expectation is that by the end of the year, the call failure rate on the internal STD system will be of the order of 10 per cent to 15 per cent, down from 40 per cent at the start of the current development programme. The aim is to reduce this further to about 4 per cent by the end of 1984.

About 92 per cent of subscribers have automatic service at present and well over 100 of the remaining 400 manual exchanges are scheduled for conversion this year. Now that the necessary trunk and local exchange capacity for more automatic traffic is coming on stream, the way is also clear to speed up this part of the programme.

For some years past, Belfast was the only area in Northern Ireland to which calls could be dialled from here, and Birmingham, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Liverpool, London and Manchester were the only centres in Britain to which subscribers could dial calls. It is possible now since late last year for subscribers to dial calls to all areas in Northern Ireland. I would hope that this will make a real contribution to bringing the two parts of Ireland closer together both for business and social purposes. From the end of this month it will be possible for subscribers on Dublin exchanges and in Cork to dial calls to all parts of Britain, and this facility will be extended to the rest of the country over the next few months. It is also possible now for up to 70 per cent of our subscribers to dial their international calls to some 70 other countries. All this is solid progress.

The other main objective of the programme is to get into a position by the end of next year where applications for telephones, telex and data can be met promptly. Again, steady progress is being made, though unevenly in different parts of the country. By the end of this year, we expect that in virtually the entire Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Portlaoise districts, four of the eight engineering districts, waiting lists will have been cleared and all applications will be capable of being met promptly. Progress will also be made in this direction in the remaining four districts, but it will take up to the end of next year before the target is fully achieved there. By the end of this year also the waiting list for telex and data will, it is planned, be virtually eliminated.

It would be very far from my intention, however, to give the impression that the various targets I have mentioned will be reached easily, or that we are or can be complacent. On the contrary, I wish to dispel any such idea. I do not have to remind Dublin Deputies in particular of the problems in regard to underground cable repairs and delays in getting telephones. There is clearly much work still to be done and an all-out effort will be made to meet the objectives of the programme. I am very conscious of the importance of good communications facilities for all types of businesses and of the need, in terms of solving the unemployment problem, to assist businesses large and small in every way possible. For this reason my Department are at present concentrating, in the Dublin area on providing telephones for business applicants. Clearly, one essential requirement is that the necessary finance should be provided and that is the purpose of this Bill.

From a financial point of view, the present is a difficult time. Substantial investment has been made in the infrastructure of the services and this should largely meet requirements for many years ahead. The scale of the necessary investment and the attendant high interest charges naturally weigh heavily on a capital-intensive service such as telecommunications. Largely because of this, there have had to be substantial increases in charges in recent years. With the increases announced in the budget, it is expected that the service should move into modest surplus this year and make some contribution towards past deficits. In the years ahead, when the current programme has been completed, it will be possible to add many more subscribers to the system and to handle a greatly increased volume of traffic with relatively small additional increases in resources. The financial performance of the service should therefore improve steadily and it should be possible to contain increases in charges well below the rate of inflation. I am satisfied, therefore, that the investment in the telecommunications development programme, apart from being essential for the economic and social well-being of the country, will also be financially rewarding.

Judging by its performance to date, Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited can be expected to continue to play a vital role in financing telecommunications development. However, as I mentioned earlier, the company will become a subsidiary of the State-sponsored body to be set up under the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982. It will be primarily for the board of the new body, Bord Telecom Éireann, to decide on the precise role of ITI after the change over.

The provisions of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982 would apply to any subsidiaries of Bord Telecom Éireann as well as to the company itself. For example, borrowing and guarantee limits would apply for the Board and its subsidiaries as a group. Accordingly, the financial activities of Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited will be subject to statutory control whether it is retained as a subsidiary of Bord Telecom Éireann or is wound up. When the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill is enacted, there will not be any further need for the Irish Telecommunications Investments Ltd. Act, 1981, or for this amending Bill and both will be repealed.

While not wishing to inhibit the scope of this debate, I would be most grateful if Deputies could agree to leave over until another time discussion of general issues related to the operation of the telecommunications service.

I commend this short Bill to the House.

Mr. Leyden

: We support this Bill because we were responsible for setting up the original company to finance the advanced telecommunications system and we realise that with the passing of time it will be necessary to increase the amount from £350 million to £600 million.

I should like to congratulate my friend and colleague from the West of Ireland, Deputy John Donnellan, on his appointment as Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs and to wish him every success. In my eight months there I found it a most interesting and stimulating Department which had, at the time, an interesting and stimulating Minister, Deputy John Wilson. I recognise the work of this great Department because they have made a major contribution to the development of posts and telecommunications in the country.

In our document The Way Forward we envisaged the need for further finance for the telecommunications services. Until 1981 all the capital required for development of the telephone service was advanced by the Exchequer. In that year a company, Irish Telecommunications Investment Limited, was established to finance capital telephone investment and it has been raising sums of money in the open market for that purpose. In 1981, for example, it raised over £90 million and in the current year it will raise £160 million. Next year the amount expected to be raised is £190 million to £200 million. Our economic plan The Way Forward indicated that the capital need over the period of the plan from 1983 to 1987 would be between £970 million and £1,200 million depending on the demand for telephone services whether by way of new connections or extra use being made of the telephone service. I wonder whether the limit of £600 million is high enough. I presume he can come before the House at any stage in the future with another Bill if required.

Our plan envisages sums being made available so that our country and in particular industrialists and business people can be sure of a high quality telephone service. A good telecommunications service is an essential infrastructural one for business people and industrialists if they are not to be placed at a disadvantage in competing with their counterparts throughout the world. We were determined that that should not happen. Indeed we gave a great degree of priority to the provision of top quality services for our people. The situation since we left office has caused a certain degree of concern because of alleged cutbacks and indeed the forecast for connections is much lower than we had proposed. I hope the Government will continue the programme we initiated which was developing in a very orderly and progressive way. A first-class telephone service must be kept as a top priority. We had a major capital programme in relation to the provision of area engineering headquarters, the provision of digital exchanges and the provision of general services to improve the structure of the services.

The Minister should outline in specific detail the programme for 1983 in view of the fact that the capital programme for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs plays a very important part in the provision of employment, especially in the building industry. The extent of the investment in this area since 1981 has created a great deal of employment in that industry. Engineering headquarters have been provided in major areas. Perhaps the Minister would outline the exact allocations for services and buildings in 1983 and 1984.

There is a need for finance, too, in the postal side of the Department. This is a question to which the new boards, when established, must give serious consideration. I should like to hear from the Minister also as to when he expects the Committee Stage of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982, to be taken. That Bill was at a very advanced stage at the time of our leaving office. The then Minister had brought it to Committee Stage. In view of the necessity to establish both the boards concerned — Bord Telecom and Bord Poist — the Minister should endeavour to have them established as quickly as possible.

Recently I expressed concern regarding some aspects of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I refer to trends in the broadcasting area. As the public are well aware, there has been a new appointment in that Department. In my days as Minister of State in that Department, I was the only Minister of State and I was attached also to the Department of Transport. There was one Minister for both Departments. We are very concerned about the appointment of a Minister of State with specific responsibility for the area of broadcasting, both radio and television.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

: We had this discussion some weeks ago. The Chair would prefer the Deputy to adhere to the question of finance.

Mr. Leyden

: Regarding the financing of the broadcasting area I wish merely to say that RTE at all times must be seen to be impartial in their production of programmes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

: This has no relevance to the question of finance. The Deputy made his protest in this regard some weeks ago so perhaps he would confine himself now to the debate.

Mr. Donnellan

: Perhaps this is the best way for him to get a little publicity.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

: Would Deputy Leyden please continue in the vein in which he started?

Mr. Leyden

: I am asking the Minister to give priority to the introduction of the Bill to set up the two semi-State organisations to which I have referred. In that way he would be going some way towards giving priority to the introduction of a Bill to set up an independent broadcasting authority which also will require financing. I should like the Minister to tell us before this debate concludes whether he will be providing funds by way of this Bill to enable the setting up of an independent broadcasting authority. There is a need to regulate what is now an unacceptable situation. Any such Bill must have provision for licensing and that will require a certain financial input. Apart from the great need for the development of broadcasting here there is the consideration also of the provision of jobs. The setting up of an independent broadcasting authority would result in the provision of much-needed employment. If the relevant legislation is not brought before the House in the near future there will be serious repercussions. I understand that recently test cards have been placed on television stations for the purpose of testing some form of illegal broadcasting of television signals.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

: There is no need for the Deputy to slip this in by a backdoor method. He should show his responsibility and speak to the Bill.

Mr. Leyden

: I am anxious that the Minister indicate whether he will provide in 1983 the finance necessary to enable an independent broadcasting authority to be established. We are anxious that the Bill be brought forward in accordance with the general principles enunciated by both Deputies Reynolds and Wilson while in office.

Another area requiring major capital investment is the area of the provision of telephones and associated services. The return from such development justifies the investment involved. There is need of much improvement in the present services to consumers generally. We need a first-class telephone service. We had as a basic principle the development of a service that would be second to none and I am sure that the same applies to the present Minister. For far too long the telephone service was neglected.

It is regrettable that the charges for telecommunications services have been increased in the past few days. In these difficult times, both for business people and for the ordinary citizen, increases of the order of 17 per cent are very steep. Again, this is a blow to the creation of employment. The Minister should have made a clear statement on the background to the need for these increases at this stage. Apart from all the other increases that have resulted from the budget, the increase in this area is most unwelcome. I should like the Minister to let us know the amount of revenue that these increases will yield. I trust that he is not contemplating any increases on the postal side because the law of diminishing returns has been reached in that regard since the increases to 22 pence and 26 pence in the cost of postage stamps.

An Ceann Comhairle

: This is outside the scope of the Bill.

Mr. Leyden

: It has a relationship to the general financing of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. The setting up of the two semi-State boards that I have mentioned is a very important matter in terms of the 30,000 people who are employed directly by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Their future is at stake and they are anxious to know as early as possible what their position will be. I trust that the Bill will be before the House shortly after the Easter recess.

In relation to the provision of buildings generally, we had outlined a very detailed programme and I should like the Minister to detail for us the investment in this area in 1983 and the projects earmarked which require the investment. We had undertaken a detailed programme which has brought about tremendous progress. In this regard I should like to pay tribute to former Ministers Wilson, Reynolds and Faulkner who played a significant role in the development of the telecommunications services.

Mr. Donnellan

: Deputy Paddy Cooney was Minister for Posts and Telegraphs for a while and I should like to know why the Deputy did not pay tribute to him.

Mr. Leyden

: They will be remembered for the commitment they gave to the development of the telecommunications service. I wish the Minister, and the Minister of State, every success in their work. I have no doubt that with the expert officials in the Department the programme we outlined will continue. I support the Bill.

Mr. Wilson

: I should like to join with Deputy Leyden in welcoming the Bill. I have already wished the Minister and the Minister of State well. The Bill increases the powers of the company, Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited, to borrow up to £600 million. We are indicating support for what was a new departure with regard to financing public enterprise. For that reason one could recommend to the Minister that he suggest to the Government that this method of financing essential infrastructural development could be applied in other Government Departments. Yesterday we were talking about decentralisation and the question of privatisation of this development. If privatisation in the sphere of telecommunications is a suitable way for financing then I do not see why it should be turned down in other areas of the public service. I gather that the intention was that all future telecommunication development would be financed under the auspices of ITI.

When he is replying I should like the Minister to comment on an apparent lack of logic in his speech. He stated:

Judging by its performance to date, Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited can be expected to continue to play a vital role in financing telecommunications development.

The Minister has said that it was envisaged that the company would become a subsidiary of the State-sponsored body to be set up. The Minister also said in his speech:

It will be primarily for the board of the new body ... to decide on the precise role of ITI after the changeover.

What puzzles me is that the Minister went on to say:

Accordingly, the financial activities of Irish Telecommunications Investments Limited will be subject to statutory control (and I am sure the House agrees that that is a good thing) whether it is retained as a subsidiary of Bord Telecom Éireann or is wound up.

I did not know that that was an option. Will the Minister tell the House if it is an option that is under consideration by the Minister or the Government? Is it envisaged that ITI should be wound up when the new boards take over? The House is directly interested in ITI as is the Minister for Finance.

The making of private funds available for development was a success in the telecommunications area and I suggest to the Minister that he spread that gospel among other members of the Government, particularly in the case of the cancelled programme of decentralisation. It is important to know where ITI will get its money. I have the greatest confidence that the board will judiciously pick the areas from which they will get their finance because, as recent events in the EMS have shown, it is easy to run into trouble by borrowing in hard currencies which at the stroke of the pen of the Minister for Finance can increase debts overnight. The Minister for Finance has told us about the extra cost in interest alone which his recent activities will mean to the country. The investment programme, the principles to be followed by ITI in getting money, is important so that they minimise the dangers of it costing the country much more.

I am glad that there is a commitment by the Minister to press ahead with the reorganisation of the Department into State-sponsored bodies. The Minister has promised to put a motion before the House after Easter proposing the restoration of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill to the Order Paper. I have a question down for a long time asking the Minister when he intended to restore that Bill to the Order Paper and our spokesman, Deputy Leyden, has also asked the Minister about that matter.

I accept that the task of bringing our service up to the standard of our partners in the European Community was a mammoth one. I do not think anybody who did not have a special interest in this development realised what a great task it was. I can recall being given figures of the numbers of telephones per caput and I was shocked to find out how far we were down on the list. I have a question on the Order Paper about the position at the end of 1982. I know there was an improvement up to December 1979, in 1980 and 1981 and I presume there was an improvement up to 31 December 1982. As far as I can recall Greece, which is not the most developed country in the EEC, has more telephones per caput than we had when I was last given statistics but our telephones are more used and we can prove that. This in some way makes up for the fact that we are way behind.

The Minister made a point about the provision of infrastructure — I do not like using that word but it is a handy piece of shorthand. The amount of money spent does not show to the extent that we can see it in actual telephones but it was an absolutely essential part of the development programme. I take the point the Minister made. The groundwork has been done in order to achieve improvements up-front where they are visible and I know that within the next 18 months or two years there will be spectacular improvement in the provision of telephones. The objective was to have telephones on demand by the end of 1984. In fairness to the engineering section of the Department, the severe snowstorm which enabled Deputy Michael O'Leary to make his reputation and the heavy rains of last June caused considerable delay because skilled people had to be diverted from the work of installation of telephones to deal with the damage to underground cables, particularly in Dublin. This held up the installation process.

There is another point the Minister should consider since we are in a difficult economic situation. Deputy Reynolds, when Minister, had a roadshow of artefacts necessary in the development of the telecommunications system which could be produced in this country. The idea was to encourage local people to make some of the equipment. I also held a number of exhibitions and I am sure the present Minister will continue this. I was very impressed by an exhibit from Waterford. A man saw a simple piece of equipment used on telegraph poles and proceeded to design and manufacture it himself. His price was competitive and he developed his product in such a way that the Department accepted it and found it to be of excellent quality. The import substitution aspect of this development is very important and I appeal to the Minister to emphasise it strongly.

I see that the Minister opened for me the Alcatel factory in Cork. They will be providing material for the home market and for export, particularly to their mother country, France. There is a possibility that the French company will make provision for investment in the company by Irish people and I would welcome this development.

When Minister I had the use of an automatic telephone but when I lost office it was taken from me. I could have kept it but at a charge of £1,500 per year for an out-of-area telephone. I gather that some people who work for the Department have out-of-area telephones for which they do not have to pay, although I am not quite sure if that is a fact. Certainly they do not have to pay the extra fees for being out of area. Public representatives should receive some consideration in this respect. I know the Minister is a kindly man and perhaps he would consider this problem. I do not like blowing my own whistle but it is difficult when one has an automatic telephone and then has to do without it. I asked them to restore the kind of service I had already, namely a night service and a Sunday service, but they did not do that for me. I suppose I could not mention it in a more influential place.

An Ceann Comhairle

: It might be more appropriate on the Estimate.

Mr. Wilson

: Possibly, but we are talking about investment and I humbly submit that this is a suitable area for investment even by the ITI. I have no complaint to make about the efficiency of the engineering staff in the area.

The Minister stated that by the end of this year he expected that in virtually the entire Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Portlaoise districts, four of the eight engineering districts, waiting lists would have been cleared and all applications would be capable of being met promptly. I would point out that there are other important areas as well. No doubt this point will not be lost upon the Minister of State.

I mentioned already the difficulty with underground cables and commented on the difficult financial position. I also stressed how important it is that substantial investment should be available through the ITI. The Minister says that ITI contributed £92 million in 1981 and £141 million in 1982, while the Exchequer financed the balance, making a total capital expenditure of £220 million in each of the years 1981 and 1982. I had some notes which indicated that ITI would be making provision for £158.5 million. Am I wrong in that figure? Then for 1983 the amount raised by ITI would be £194 million, leaving £32 million for the Exchequer.

I should prefer the accounting year to end on 31 December. This would make more sense because the statistics are compiled to that date.

The idea of looking for long-term rather than short-term funds is relevant. It is important that we should see the Irish Pound and its relativity to other currencies as an essential factor. Borrowing will be substantially in foreign currency and that imposes certain obligations. We look forward to the return to the Order Paper of the main Bill. I should like the Minister to allay my fears regarding his statement on the winding-up of ITI. I understood that when the two boards were set up it was to become a subsidiary of Bord Telecom. Is that still the Minister's intention?

I welcome the Bill and I wish the Ministers every success in this field. The fact that this money is available through ITI eases their task to a certain extent at the Cabinet table. I know the statutory element will guarantee that the public are getting good value in what ITI are borrowing, lending and leasing back. I recommend that we should explore the possibility of doing this in other areas as well.

Níl a thuilleadh le rá agam ach a rá leis an Aire go mbeidh an Teachta Leyden, urlabhraí ar son Fhianna Fáil, agus mé féin ag cabhrú leo san obair dheacair atá le déanamh acu chun teileafóin a chur ar fáil do shaoránaigh sa tír seo sa chaoi go mbeidh teileafón le fáil ag saoránach ar bith a thúisce is a scríobhann sé chuig an Aire Poist agus Telegrafa.

Mr. Tunney

: Níl mise chun chur isteach ar an Teach ró-mhór. Ní theastaíonn uaim ach labhairt ar an ócáid seo maidir le deacrachtraí atá i mo cheantar féin chomh fada is a bhaineann sé le cúrsaí teileafóna. Tugaim faoi deara ón méid ata ráite ag mo chara, an Teachta Donnellan, go bhfuil sé ag súil nach mbeidh diospóireacht faoin seirbhís go ginearálta.

It is not often one gets the opportunity of simultaneously saying thanks and congratulations to a former team and a new team. I refer to my colleagues, Deputies John Wilson and Terry Leyden, both of whom enjoyed the offices now served by the Minister, Deputy Jim Mitchell, and the Minister of State, Deputy John Donnellan. In saying my thanks to the former team on this side I say welcome and congratulations to Deputy Jim Mitchell and Deputy John Donnellan.

I note the content of the last paragraph of the statement of the Minister of State in which he appealed that we would not on this occasion stray too widely into the whole area of the telephone service. It is not my intention to do so. I propose, in the course of about five minutes, to give my thoughts briefly on the matter. As a public representative if I am being asked to associate with a request for £200 million to be made available in respect of borrowing for 1983 and another £50 million left aside for borrowing maybe in 1984 and bearing in mind that it is the people who have to pay that money directly or indirectly, it would be remiss of me not to say how I feel in respect of the lack of service being provided for my constituents.

The telephone is probably one of the greatest inventions of all time because it allows for conversation between people who are far away from each other. I would remind the House that we have enshrined in our Constitution the importance of the family. There is no more important unit. Irish families are very closely knit and they are different from most other European families. Even though some of us leave the home nest we are anxious when we move away to keep closely in touch with our parents, brothers and sisters. The telephone ideally should provide the perfect service for that.

I am concerned that when a request comes for such a large sum as we are being asked to provide today I must advise the House that in regard to that service in my constituency the only word to describe it is hopeless. It is not possible, even though you have the service, to communicate in a satisfactory manner. Invariably the telephones are out of order when you try to make calls and very often it is not possible to make telephone calls. If you establish contact with your mother or anybody else, interruptions very often occur. That happens even at a distance of one mile or one-and-a-half miles away. On the other hand, I find I can ring my son in London and I have no difficulty at all. When I am in Brussels or some other place I can ring home and there is no difficulty at all. I hope we are not moving into a type of élitism in respect of this service.

I agree with having the highest ideals and aiming for the highest standards when we are aspiring to the same standards which operate in European countries. I am afraid with regard to the standards here when one is communicating between son and parent, brother and sister, we have a long road to travel. It would not be fair of me to let this opportunity pass without asking the Minister to ensure that a small amount of that £200 million which is being borrowed is applied to serving the needs of my constituents, who are tax-paying people, working hard and who are not asking for too much out of this life except that they should have this service which would allow them to communicate with each other.

Under the Fianna Fáil Government there was a waiting period, but there are people in Finglas and Ballymun who are waiting for five years for a telephone. That is not an exaggeration. It was confirmed to me in the House. How can anybody come before me and speak of the need to have £200 million so that we can enjoy what seems to me to be the sophistication of a great telecommunications service. I cannot accept that when I know there are people waiting for five years to have a telephone in my constituency. If we take it again at the level of the family I make no apology for saying that my first interest is in my fellow man. I believe in the old Chinese proverb that if we are continually looking at the stars we will not see what is at our feet. I believe we are neglecting what is at our feet, our neighbours. I know I shall not cause any embarrassment to the former team or the new team to whom I referred because none of the four Deputies in question were in office five years ago.

I will refer to another matter which occurred one-and-a-half years ago when people who had applied were given to understand that the service would be available. They were invited to lodge a sum of £120 and were assured the service would be provided inside three months.

An Ceann Comhairle

: That matter does not arise on this Bill.

Mr. Tunney

: I am afraid I could not agree at all, because the whole raison d'être of what we are discussing is communication and to me there is nothing more vital in respect of the moneys required than that to which I refer. As my sons and daughters would say to me: “If it is not about what I am talking about what, then, is it in aid of?” Is it in aid of this élitism? Are we guaranteeing that people with businesses here — and I understand they pay for the service — will have a perfect system? Are we guaranteeing professional people will have it? But are we treating the-man-in-the-street, the person who is concerned, the person who pays, differently? Are we trying to establish that his right is to wait some other occasion?

As far as I am concerned, and I am sure if you, a Cheann Comhairle, were standing where I am — I do not propose to impose on your patience or your audience at any great length — you would accept that the need of some old age pensioner in Cappagh, who has not got a phone, is as great or greater than the need of any business concern which has got a phone. An old age pensioner may have a daughter living three or four miles away. That daughter may have a baby but the old age pensioner cannot go to see the baby. She is, however, naturally anxious about it and she wants to ring up the daughter to find out how the baby is. That, to me, is a perfect interest, one that is to be satisfied ideally with this service and, if it is not provided, we are entitled here to criticise the absence of it. If, on the other hand, the daughter is concerned about the wellbeing of either of her parents it is important she should have this service available to her.

As I said initially, I do not intend to develop this at any great length. All I am doing is indicating how wrong I thought it was for a Department — and I remember discussing this with Deputy Harte when he was Minister — to take £120 from a poor person in my constituency, guaranteeing he or she would have a service within three months, holding on to the £120 for a year and then blandly telling that person from whom the money had been taken that they were sorry they could not supply the service but, if he or she so wished, they would return the money, paying no interest on it. I do not regard that as a fair or just operation for any Government department. I do not think there is any need for me to labour that which is my concern in respect of this Bill, a Bill which I welcome. I am merely asking that a small amount of that money be laid aside so that the people — I do not like using the term "the ordinary people", but the plain people of Ireland, the people of Ireland, the best people of Ireland — who have service and who pay for the service should have a perfect service and those who are waiting many years for it and are prepared to pay for it should get it. I think that is a very reasonable request.

I do not know what the situation is in the constituency so well served by the Minister of State but I am quite sure the Minister will be aware, because he represents a constituency not very different from my own, of such injustice operating in his own constituency and I look forward, when he comes to reply, to getting an assurance that the needs of these people will be met and their rights will not be neglected in respect of the additional moneys being sought.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. J. Mitchell)

: I want to apologise for not being able to introduce this Bill myself but I was detained elsewhere on important Government business. I am glad of the opportunity of being here to reply to the debate. First, I want to say a word of sincere appreciation to the Opposition for their help in the enactment of this Bill. The Bill was, of course, envisaged by Deputy Wilson, my predecessor in the Department.

In relation to the main Bill, the P & T Services Bill, on which Deputy Leyden and Deputy Wilson raised questions and sought clarification, I would reiterate it is the Government's intention to reintroduce the P & T Services Bill at Committee Stage by motion as soon as possible after the Easter recess. I cannot be more specific than that. Deputy Wilson, as Minister responsible for the Bill, undertook in discussions with the trade unions certain amendments which I intend to honour. They are either drafted or are in course of being drafted. We have some further amendments in mind following on-going discussions with the trade unions and other Departments. I am very keen to have the Bill before the House at Committee Stage as quickly as possible.

I am a little distressed to hear of Deputy Wilson's telephone experience. I did not know anything about it and I shall certainly make inquiries this afternoon and, if I can help to alleviate the situation, I shall certainly do so.

I do not want to be dragged off course on this Bill but Deputy Leyden spent a little time on broadcasting before——

Mr. Leyden

: He was ruled out of order.

Mr. J. Mitchell

: He inquired whether money would be made available from An Bord Telecom or IT Investments Limited for broadcasting. That, of course, is not envisaged. As I said earlier on in this House, we hope we will have before the House in the course of the year legislation dealing with broadcasting and wireless telegraphy plus the question of the development of local broadcasting. It is for that precise reason and because it is an area in regard to which Ministers have not been able to give enough time and attention in order to look after it that we appointed a second Minister to look after it. That has been the subject of a great deal of criticism by Deputy Leyden. However, I think he will see the wisdom of it when we make the progress we envisage during the course of the year.

Deputy Wilson asked about the amount of money provided last year. Last year the Exchequer provided £80 million and ITI £141 million. This year the Exchequer proposes to provide £32 million and ITI £194 million. Deputy Wilson voiced concern about ITI being wound up. Let me explain the situation. ITI is a statutory company set up by legislation, legislation this Bill is amending, in order to increase borrowing limits. It was a purely temporary arrangement until An Bord Telecom was set up. When this board is statutorily set up the need for maintaining ITI will no longer exist and it will be a matter for An Bord Telecom to decide whether or not they should continue ITI as a subsidiary.

I must say I wholeheartedly identify with the problems Deputy Tunney raised and he, being a near constituent of mine, will be aware of how aware I am of the problems in the constituency. He has a neighbouring constituency and I am sure the problems are quite similar there. There is no doubt that there are major telecommunications problems in Dublin. We have an unsatisfactory situation in relation to repairs. There is a backlog but this has been considerably reduced. Hopefully in another few weeks people will not have to wait very long to have their telephone repaired. I hope that by the end of the year 90 per cent of all faults will be put right within two days and the balance within five days. The Minister of State is addressing himself to this.

Dublin has also a major problem in relation to telephone connections. By the end of this year much of the country outside of Dublin will be supplied with telephones almost on demand. We are working very hard to achieve this and I am confident that it will be done. There are already a number of areas where telephones are available on demand and Kilkenny is one of these. It will be the end of next year before telephones will be supplied on demand in Dublin.

The programme for connections and new exchanges is on target. If there is anything I or the Minister of State can do to achieve our targets earlier we will do it. It is only right to admit that there are major problems in Dublin but every effort is being made to alleviate them. There is light at the end of the tunnel. When I tell people that by the end of next year we will have telephones more or less on demand they say to me "I heard it before, Joe". Announcements were made in the past about the number of telephone connections which would be made each year. I remember a famous intervention by the Minister of State, Deputy Donnellan, when he was in Opposition and when Deputy Reynolds was Minister. Deputy Reynolds said that a great number of telephones would be connected and Deputy Donnellan asked how many were working. We should only install as many telephones as can be properly serviced.

Money was taken from people on the basis of their having a telephone installed in the near future. In my constituency I know of a few cases where people were left waiting for telephone installations for over a year. I regret that this ever happened. I will ensure, as far as I can, that this will not happen in future and that money will not be sought unless we are confident that we can supply and install telephones.

I should like to pay tribute to my pre decessors — Deputies Wilson, Cooney, Reynolds, Faulkner and to Dr. Conor Cruise O'Brien. They in their time were the butt of much criticism because of faults in the telephone system. They are the people who conceived the plans for the development of the service, and they worked hard. Hopefully I will be the Minister who will deliver a first-class telephone service but it is only fair that those who took much of the criticism in the past should take much of the credit for the first-class service which is now on the horizon. Such a service will be important for our economic development as well as for personal and social reasons. It is vitally important for industrial development.

In the next few weeks all automatic exchanges will be able to dial direct to the whole of the UK as well as to 70 other countries. That is a very big step forward. Areas of the country which up to now were considered isolated will be more attractive for industrial development. The telephone system which is developing now is a digital one and gives us a great advantage over all other European countries. We are at least three years ahead of any other country and will have the most advanced system in Europe. As the system is digitalised it gives us a great opportunity for attracting information based industries. This together with developments in satellite broadcasting offers great scope for the country. If we can attract additional industries because of the new telephone system those who have held the office as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and were in the hot seat will deserve their share of the credit.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take Committee Stage today.