Vol. 416 No. 2
15 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications if she has received the report of the consultants appointed to inquire into An Post; and if she will make it available to Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas through the Library.
51 Tomás Mac Giolla asked the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications if she will outline her views on the proposals for restructuring put forward by An Post; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
52 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications if she will agree to publish the list of post offices and sub-post offices which An Post decided to close following the conclusion of her predecessor's consultations with An Post.
123 Mr. Currie asked the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications when she will announce her intentions in relation to the An Post viability plan; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 15, 51, 52 and 123 together.
As the House is already aware, An Post is in a serious financial situation. The company's accumulated losses to the end of 1991 amounted to some £15 million and by the end of 1993 could have grown to some £40 million. I am seriously concerned about An Post's loss making situation and I am anxious that remedial measures be put in place at an early date without recourse to State subsidy or general increases in postal charges. The main reasons for An Post's problems are increasing operating costs, low mail volume growth and competition from modern telecommunications services and couriers. Staff costs, which account for 80 per cent of total operating costs, have increased sharply in recent years despite substantial staff reductions.
In February 1991 An Post announced their viability plan, with the objective of achieving savings of £24 million by 1995. In September 1991 my predecessor requested An Post, inter alia, to withdraw their viability plan as originally presented, and to put in place the means by which they can meet their statutory financial targets, the immediate priority being to agree on measures with the unions to enable the company to achieve break-even by the end of 1992. The necessary company/union negotiations are being conducted under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission and while some progress has been made to date, I am not satisfied that sufficient progress has been made to enable the company to break even by the end of 1992.
An Post have suspended consideration of their proposals to close sub-post offices and to instal roadside letterboxes pending the outcome of a socio-economic consultancy study. The consultants' report has been finalised and I will be examining the report in detail. As regards the closure of sub-post offices, there is no list as such. An Post have identified criteria for closure of sub-post offices, which have formed part of the consultancy study. Closures would depend on the outcome of consultations with the Irish Postmasters Union and on the uptake by postmasters and postmistresses of severance terms. In due course I will arrange for publication of the consultants' report and to make it available to Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas.
Have the original proposals for saving £24 million and reducing staff been shelved and what are the staffing proposals for An Post now?
As I said, discussions are continuing on enabling the company to achieve break-even by the end of 1992. Those discussions are taking place under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. All areas of difficulty, with the exception of those issues that were referred to the consultants, are under discussion by the Labour Relations Commission.
Bearing in mind the gravity of what I am about to say, I respectfully suggest to the Minister she has been misinformed by her officials in relation to the closure of sub-post offices.
There should be no reflection on officials. The Minister is responsible.
There should be no closure of post offices, full stop.
There have been a number of closures, even in the Minister's own constituency. I have no doubt the Minister is aware of the closure of the office in Dominick Street, Galway. That was not part of the deal.
I regret very much that the Minister did not respond to Deputy Kavanagh's question regarding the report commissioned by her predecessor. Until such time as that report was presented, there were to be no closures. Several positions have not been filled after the retirement or the death of a postmaster or postmistress. In addition, the code of discipline is being tightened up. In County Cork recently there was an instance involving a young man——
This is becoming a very long question.
——in what I consider to have been a very trivial offence. Every means is being used to shed staff, and I respectfully suggest that is done without the Minister's knowledge.
Under procedures that existed before the establishment of An Post, the company review the position at each sub-post office as it becomes vacant for whatever reason — whether by retirement or death, as Deputy O'Sullivan referred to — and when there is no application to transfer the appointment to a member of the same family. In carrying out the review, An Post consider the commercial viability of the office, the distance from the nearest post office and local conditions before arriving at a decision.
The Minister referred to the serious financial situation of An Post. May I remind her that in February 1991 — exactly one year ago — her predecessor spoke in the House about unsustainable financial losses of An Post requiring urgent action.
A question, please.
Will the Minister confirm that urgent action is being taken, despite what she has said, and that the urgent action is represented by the hit list compiled by An Post of post offices they intend to close down and are already allowing to close down?
I reject the allegation that An Post have a hit list——
They have a hit list.
——of sub-post offices they wish to close. I explained in reply to a supplementary question asked by Deputy O'Sullivan the basis of which An Post has continued the closure of sub-post offices. The discussions about the financial difficulties of An Post are continuing at two levels: one level at the Labour Relations Commission and the other level concerns specific points in the viability plan that were referred to the consultants.
A Ceann Comhairle——
I am sorry, the time for dealing with questions is well nigh exhausted. I shall hear two brief questions from Deputy McCartan and Deputy Farrelly.
Does the Minister not accept that by her reconfirmation in the House today that the Government propose no subvention to An Post she is leaving the company in an impossible position and that there must be drastic and widespread redundancies forced on the company? Will she not again review the 1983 legislation and the accompanying undertaking of Government capital support for An Post to enable them to modernise and to move on? Without that support the Minister is leaving An Post high and dry.
I confirm once again that it is the preferred option that there should not be recourse to either State subsidy or increased postal charges in order for An Post to achieve its break-even target. There is no question of a change on that policy.
Will the Minister accept that even though the Government have told An Post not to go ahead with their plan of sub-post office closures that is what they are doing? Will she also do something about changing the position where the closure of a sub-post office has resulted in pensioners being asked to travel ten miles in order to collect their pension?
On the basis of the decision of my predecessor to refer that aspect of the viability plan to the consultants, I am informed by An Post that the only sub-post office closures that have taken place have occurred on the retirement or death of a postmaster or postmistress and where no member of the family of the individual concerned was prepared to apply for appointment to the sub-post office. If Deputy Farrelly has specific instances of that policy not being pursued by An Post I should be grateful if he would instance them to me.
That disposes of questions for today.
Before you leave Question Time, I point out that Question No. 22, which I had tabled, was taken outside my control under Priority Questions in priority time. I was not allowed to ask a supplementary question. I should like my objection to that procedure to be recorded.
I am surprised at the Deputy. I explained the reasons for that in the House. The Deputy should check the record.
As your constituency colleague; you agreed the system.
