Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 17 Nov 1988

Vol. 384 No. 4

Adjournment Debate. - Dublin Post Office Closure.

Mr. McDowell

I thank the House for giving me the opportunity to raise this issue. The Minister for Social Welfare may feel that some of the issues which arise in this debate are distant from him, but he will appreciate that since the passage of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act this House has no direct control over the manner in which the postal service is organised, where services are provided and under what circumstances they may be terminated or changed. However, this House does have an obvious interest in ensuring that social welfare business which, to a large extent, is operated through the post office system, is transacted in a manner which is just to elderly people.

The circumstances under which I sought this Adjournment debate are as follows. For 80 years there has been a post office at Clanbrassil Street in the city of Dublin. It has recently come to the attention of public representatives, the community at large and the local community council of St. Kevin's Parish that An Post proposed to terminate this service. They were availing of the opportunity afforded by the fact that the sub-postmistress proposed to retire. That casual fact was to be seized on as the pretext for closing down this post office.

I want to make it clear that I do not believe the whole postal service has to be preserved in aspic. I am not suggesting that every subpost office must be preserved, nor am I suggesting that because this post office happens to be located on the border between my constituency and that of Deputy O'Brien that it assumes some special importance. However, it is important that the Minister should know that Deputy O'Brien, Deputy Brady, Deputy Mitchell and I, as well as other public representatives and a huge cross section of the local community, were present at a meeting in Synge Street Christian Brothers School the other day. The meeting was packed to the rafters with ordinary people from the area who were inconvenienced or put out by the loss of a local post office. There were many elderly people at that meeting for whom this change would mean a great injustice.

An Post had indicated there were five subpost offices within a mile, but for an elderly lady — and there were some there who were partly immobile — such distances are a problem. More than 100 traders had also protested that they lose a local facility which is important for trade and for bringing people into the locality. Of course, they do not concern the Minister for Social Welfare. However, pensioners and people who get allowances from the Department of Social Welfare through such a post office would be very adversely affected if they had to travel a mile on foot — most of these people do not have cars or any other facility to travel long distances to cash their pension certificates.

The Minister is one of the chief customers of An Post. He uses An Post to deliver the service to old age pensioners. He has a very legitimate and real concern where subpost offices are to be closed that this service is maintained. When An Post propose to close a post office, especially in an urban area, it is important for them to consult the Department to see whether the Minister, who has a duty to the public, is in a position to see whether it is a reasonable closure. In this case it does not seem to be a reasonable closure. What is much worse is that nobody from An Post came to explain the matter to the community, nobody was present at the meeting and we have since heard that Deputy Mooney circulated a notice in the area saying that as a result of the intervention by the Minister for Communications, Deputy Burke, a decision had been made to postpone indefinitely the closure of this sub-post office. I have doubts as to whether the Minister has the power to intervene in relation to individual sub-post offices — perhaps it is substantially true — but the fact remains that, for many people, a very important local facility is under threat and access to the Department of Social Welfare is substantially worsened and made more difficult by decisions of this kind.

An entire community was united on this issue even though it is under very serious stress. The inner city areas of Dublin contain many elderly people, there is a high degree of crime and to travel a mile with your pension and perhaps your Christmas bonus in your handbag or wallet at the age of 75 or 80 is a hazardous enterprise, especially when these post offices are watched and beset by young people on occasions bent on robbery and mugging of those people. The south and north inner city areas are in crisis and withdrawal of services of this kind, making it more difficult to get social welfare entitlements, are the very things that lead to creating a concrete desert and abandonment of those areas.

I appeal to the Minister to use his undoubted political and correct clout with An Post to say "no" to closures of this kind. The system of social welfare in which the Minister is involved in supervising and which delivers redistribution to the deprived and weaker sections in the community should not be the subject of arbitrary decisions based on the fact that a person will or will not retire.

I appeal to the Minister to assure the House that he will get in touch with An Post and put as much pressure as he can on them to ensure that these services continue to be available to the elderly in circumstances where it is not a huge hardship on them to get their entitlements, that is, reasonable access to the minimal pension the State can afford.

Mr. O'Brien

I thank Deputy McDowell for sharing his time with me. This is a very important debate because it highlights the whole question of the payment of social welfare benefits, particularly old age pensions, in post offices. Many post offices are totally inadequate to deal with the present day social welfare society and for An Post to arbitrarily withdraw a service from a very busy community containing many elderly people is not acceptable. The plan of An Post seems to be that if a post mistress resigns, they will close the post office.

There is another post office in my constituency, Greenlea Road, Terenure, where the very same thing happened. There is also an elderly population drawing pensions in the area and, without consultation or debate, these people in their well heated offices took the decision to close it. Today we heard that the decision to close the post office in Clanbrassil Street has been deferred. What kind of management is this? If that is the way An Post run their business it speaks volumes for the argument against monopolies. However, the fact that An Post are a monopoly means that they have an obligation to provide a proper service. I appeal to the Minister for Social Welfare to ensure that this kind of activity will not be tolerated by his Department. They simply cannot close offices, willy nilly, without consultation. In this case, the Department have an obligation to intervene.

An Post would run a very efficient bureaucracy if they did not have any customers, who seem to be in the way and preventing them from doing a good job. If they were running a private business their customers would come first but that certainly is not the case. A representative did not even bother to attend the residents' meeting the other night. Only yesterday afternoon, I spoke to a senior official in the post office who did not know that the decision had been postponed indefinitely. I thought when semi-State bodies were set up it removed day to day intervention by a Minister but that does not seem to be the case. Perhaps it is important for Ministers to intervene and to exert pressure but it should be one way or the other. The system should also be looked at to see if there is a better way of paying our social welfare. There are plenty of banks and building societies all over the place and perhaps they could be used in the social welfare area. An Post must be told that if they treat people like this, the business will be removed from them. I know that the Minister is concerned for the elderly and they are the prime consideration in this matter. The heavy hand should be used on them to say "this far and no further". Indeed, An Post should be compelled to improve post offices so that they are reasonably comfortable for their customers. In a post office in Crumlin, people have to queue on the road to collect their pensions and other social welfare payments. Is that good enough in this day and age? Anything seems to be good enough for the poor.

The Minister's Department should look at all these matters and ensure that these people are treated as humanely as obviously, An Post have thrown in the towel and are not terribly concerned about their customers, a fact which I very much regret.

Minister for Social Welfare (Dr. Woods)

Deputy O'Brien pinpointed many of the problems in relation to An Post. He said that semi-State bodies are set up and are not to be interfered with by Ministers. They are told to be efficient and to get on with the job and this is where the conflict arises when we are dealing with something which has such social concerns as this question obviously has.

There is a large number of pensioners, invalidity pensioners and widows attending this centre. An Post are concerned with the overall programme of rationalisation. As the Deputies may be aware, at this stage An Post are reviewing the question of closing Clanbrassil Street post office and have deferred a decision on this matter. The question of the opening or closing of a post office is a matter for An Post. We appreciate the difficulties they have but we express our concern in the matter. We are particularly concerned that there will be an alternative post office available within a reasonable distance. That is normally the problem that arises if An Post make a hardline decision to close.

I am concerned to ensure that social welfare claimants receive a fast, efficient and modern service. Considerable progress is being made to ensure that claimants will have an integrated service at local level with access to information on all their social welfare entitlements. In terms of making payment to clients, I would like, naturally, to see also as many paying outlets as possible, preferably in local community and neighbourhood centres. I must point out, however, that the decision as to the closure of post offices is an internal matter for An Post. My concern is to ensure that before arriving at such a decision adequate alternative arrangements are available for social welfare clients.

An Post, as a commercial State-sponsored body, are concerned with competitiveness. The Fifth Joint Oireachtas Committee on Commercial State-sponsored Bodies in their second report pointed out the advantages which exist in relation to the size of the post office network, in the case for example of the agency work undertaken for my Department. However, the report also points to the fact that the geographical distribution and physical condition of much of its stock of fixed assets moderates the advantages derived from the overall size and geographical spread of that stock. The report found that there are now too many post offices with too small a customer base and, the report indicates, there have, conversely, been shortages of building accommodation in certain areas. Prior to the establishment of An Post, investment in the telecommunications service had tended to be given priority over investment in the postal service. All of this now means that An Post are faced with high levels of cost in maintaining a competitive, modern and efficient organisation.

I understand that An Post re-examine the viability of post offices when they become vacant, for example, in the event of the death or retirement of a postmaster or postmistress. They assess the matter from a number of viewpoints but their decision is, ultimately, based on commercial considerations. My concern is to ensure that in arriving at such a decision, An Post are not causing inconvenience for any of the social welfare clients who rely on the particular post office as their office of payment.

An Post, having conducted an internal review of a particular post office, notify my Department in advance of the proposed closure of a post office. All the alternative post offices are listed and consideration is given by An Post to the proximity of these post offices to the one about to close. Many of the social welfare claimants involved are elderly pensioners and an assessment of the new arrangements is made, taking into account that old age and invalidity pensioners have access to free travel.

Social welfare claimants are always offered a choice in nominating their post office of payment — the options available will, obviously, depend on where they are living. In rural areas, the choice of post office of payment is likely to be fairly restricted. I am assured, however, that An Post are very conscious of the importance of sub-post offices in rural areas and do not wish to close them without good reason.

In the case of urban areas, there is usually a considerable number of options available to social welfare clients. Thus, for example, in the case of the post office cited by the Deputy — Clanbrassil Street in Dublin 8 — An Post have pointed out that there are five other post offices which are located within a radius of half a mile or so from that particular post office. These post offices are: Upper Kevin Street, Harcourt Road, which is actually in Richmond Street, Camden Street, Harolds Cross and Dolphins Barn. I should say, again, at this stage that I have been informed of An Post's intention of deferring the closure of Clanbrassil Street Post Office pending further review.

In all cases where the Department is notified that a post office is about to close, we write to the pensioners and recipients of other social welfare payments who have been receiving their payments at that post office, asking them to nominate an alternative post office for receipt of payment. in the case of Clanbrassil Street, it is not intended to make any alternative arrangements for making social welfare payments until An Post inform us of the outcome of the review currently in progress.

The network of post offices forms an important part of the payment structure in place for social welfare claimants and naturally I am concerned to ensure that all claimants have convenient and easy to use methods for cashing their entitlements. For this reason I am also actively pursuing ways of introducing as wide a degree of flexibility as I can into the various payment methods that the Department use at the moment. A large variety of payment methods are used, such as payments in cash, by cheques, by postal draft or by books of paying orders cashable at named post offices. With the introduction of computerised facilities in many areas of the Department, it will be possible to develop more modern payment methods for social welfare claimants. Direct transfer of payments by electronic means into bank or post-office savings accounts are possibilities which are being planned for.

In that regard we have carried out reviews of people's attitudes to these kinds of changes. Unfortunately, the elderly are very reluctant to change to new systems and that can be one of the difficulties that arises. Whereas younger people will agree to an alternative system which may be much more convenient for them, elderly people are very reluctant to do so and the surveys which have been carried out show that. This development is, however, some way down the road yet but is one which we have under active consideration. A solution of this kind would clearly meet some of the difficulties being experienced by claimants who may consider that they have too far to travel to their nearest local post office.

In the meantime, however, An Post are aware of our concern on behalf of social welfare claimants but the question of the opening or closing of post offices is a matter within their own competence. I will, of course, keep the matter under review and will raise it with them as the occasion requires. I would like to assure Deputies McDowell and O'Brien that I am very concerned about this matter. There are some areas where there are very few claimants and it is somewhat understandable that it is difficult to keep a post office open in these areas. The Deputies are right in indicating that there is a large number of claimants in the case of Clanbrassil Street. The Deputies can rest assured that I will convey their concern, after this evening's session in the House, to An Post. The matter has been deferred for the moment and in this particular case it may be deferred for quite a long time.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 22 November 1988.