Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Mar 2006

Vol. 616 No. 3

Adjournment Debate.

Postal Services.

Mr. Broughan

I have been trying to raise the issue of the closure of Priorswood post office on Clonshaugh Avenue, Dublin 17, for the past three weeks. On behalf of the people of Priorswood, I am grateful to the Ceann Comhairle for facilitating this issue.

Over the past three years, creating a secure, long-term future for An Post has occupied much of the House's time. There was a lengthy industrial dispute resulting in the company's failure to pay national pay awards and the long ensuing struggle in the system of collection and delivery that lasted until the end of 2005. At the same time, grave concerns about rapidly falling numbers of post offices have been expressed throughout the national network. As the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources heard, the Irish Postmasters Union drew attention to the large reductions in the network from approximately 2,000 outlets a decade ago to fewer than 1,400 18 months ago.

Since he was transferred to the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, has presided over the closure of a post office once every three weeks. For example, 18 post offices were closed in 2005, including in Brandon in County Kerry, Coolbawn in County Kilkenny, Broadford in County Kildare, Fourmilehouse in County Roscommon, Rathfeigh in County Meath and Killiney in Dublin. ComReg's recently published residential and business postal survey showed that the bulk of Irish businesses continued to rely on An Post and spent an average of €6,000 each in 2005. A total of nine items of mail were delivered on average to each Irish home address per week and five items on average were posted weekly by Irish households. As such, An Post remains a key element of the Irish economy and life. The company recently delivered an attractive leaflet entitled "You Decide, We Deliver" to each household and business in Ireland advertising its reorganised services.

However, for the people of the 18 post office districts that closed in 2005 and my constituents in Priorswood parish, this promise rings hollow. Priorswood is typical of many parishes that have similarly suffered. Four weeks ago, a notice was placed in the post office in Priorswood announcing its immediate closure from 6 March and the removal of all post office services to Clarehall shopping centre in Dublin 13. Senior citizens and recipients of pensions and benefits were stunned by the announcement. Many senior citizens face the weekly trek to Clarehall or northside shopping centres with great dismay, as do mothers of young children and the many customers in the area living as much as a mile from public transport.

Local traders led by our popular local pharmacist, Mr. John Corr, immediately contacted An Post and I to seek a reversal of the decision. Following my discussions with Mr. Matt Lennon and other An Post officials, it became clear that the postmistress of Priorswood had decided on economic and security grounds to relocate to the Tesco-owned Clarehall shopping centre. The closure of Priorswood post office has been a grave inconvenience and terrible setback for the more than 2,000 households of Priorswood parish.

The closest post office, at northside shopping centre, has a large catchment area and long queues are often a feature of its operation. Priorswood post office was clearly a viable operation and the abrupt closure without any consultation with residents, community leaders and public representatives is unacceptable. An Post does not seem to have any rules, regulations or criteria covering post office closures or openings, as I will propose in my concluding remarks. Are there any regulations or criteria and why have I not received them to show my constituents and interested local traders?

The Clarehall shopping centre lies at the southern end of a large new urban development of up to 20,000 housing and ancillary commercial developments called the "north fringe". It is clear that this district needs and will have at least one post office. The residents of Clarehall and adjoining estates are happy to receive a postal service, which is to be welcomed. However, the residents of Priorswood parish feel badly let down by An Post. I was grateful to meet An Post's chief operations officer, Mr. Larry Donald, last Thursday in this building. He gave me a thorough briefing on the Priorswood situation and An Post generally but believed the closure was irreversible. I told him the local Clonshaugh shopping centre traders led by Mr. Corr were quite prepared to open a new post office in Priorswood, which should be seriously considered. I hope Mr. Corr, Mr. Lennon and their colleagues will meet Mr. Donald and his executive team in the coming weeks.

Recently, An Post announced the selection of its financial services partner Fortis from the European mainland, which will give a significant boost to the operation of all remaining post offices. The proposed financial services and products for citizens who never had the opportunity to avail of these in the past is a real possibility and a bright point in the future for the An Post company.

Priorswood parish lies in the heart of the original Northside partnership operation area, having suffered serious social disadvantage, unemployment and associated problems over the past two decades. The people of the parish loved the post office and desperately need a postal service. The new Clare Hall service is now operational and Priorswood is closed but citizens are willing to provide a new service for Priorswood. Action should be taken by Mr. Donald and the An Post management team. Similar consideration should be given to all other areas that wish to retain much-loved post offices.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. Fahey)

I am responding in this debate on behalf of the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey.

The future development of An Post is, in the first instance, a matter for the board and management of An Post. The Government is fully committed to An Post remaining a strong player in the Irish postal market but the market will change over the coming years. The Government recognises the invaluable contribution made by An Post and its staff down through the years. It recognises the contribution of An Post to the overall business environment and it also accepts the role played by rural post offices and the staff of An Post, especially in rural areas, in contributing to the social fabric of rural society.

On the future of the postal services, I believe that An Post will continue to play a key national role. It will continue to deliver post and provide Government and financial services through its nationwide network of post office outlets. The market for traditional postal and post office services is changing globally. Meeting customer needs has become more important than ever and international forecasts now predict that these challenges are likely to grow in intensity and complexity over the coming years.

To remain competitive, An Post needs to build on its long established and trusted brand name. It also needs to deploy its resources in a manner which continues to serve existing customers' needs and attracts additional customers for a range of new services. There is also widespread agreement that change is required if the postal services of An Post are to adapt to the modern business environment and to offer a high quality nationwide delivery service to the customer into the future. An Post management and the main trade union, the Communications Workers Union, have recently signed up to a recovery plan, incorporating details of proposed new collection and delivery arrangements, which the Government believes will assist the company in meeting the challenges of an increasingly competitive and technologically changing postal market. Other unions had already signed up to changes.

The challenge for An Post concerning the post office network is to develop a strategy that satisfies the needs of existing customers, while attracting new customers into post offices. An Post has already had some success in winning new business and continues to benefit from a considerable amount of Government business, especially in the areas of social welfare payments and savings products.

The network of An Post comprises the single largest number of retail outlets in the country. Ireland has one of the highest number of post offices per head of population in Europe. In recent years, some network restructuring has been undertaken in line with similar trends across Europe. In addition to the post office network, An Post has also established 2,864 Postpoint outlets in retail premises of which 600 can be used for bill payment.

It is the Government's objective to maintain the largest economically sustainable post office network possible. The challenge for all stakeholders in An Post is to generate sufficient profitable business to maintain as large a network as is sustainable. The network has a high footfall and to capitalise on these advantages, it is essential that existing and new services are developed to meet customer requirements. The network also has the capacity and potential to deliver more private business, especially in financial services. Opportunities in this area are being pursued by An Post.

On foot of substantial investment in computerisation, a significant amount of extra business has already been obtained for the network in terms of banking and utility business. At present 95% of An Post's business is conducted through its 991 automated offices.

The Minister has also asked the company to ensure that any strategy for its development should ensure the long-term viability of the post office network. An Post is working on a new financial services initiative. This could see the development and expansion of the range of financial services that it can deliver through its network of post offices in partnership with another financial services partner. Following recent Government approval, the management of the company has begun detailed exclusive negotiations with its preferred partner. If the initiative proves to be successful, it could lead to a significant increase in post office business and contribute to the viability of the network.

European Enforcement Order.

Mr. Gilmore

This issue concerns a scam that was the subject of an article by Neil Callanan in The Sunday Business Post on 30 January 2005. The scam is operated by an outfit called European City Guide, based in Spain. European City Guide sends a form to unsuspecting small businesses, such as professionals, charities, galleries and schools. The form appears to be one that requests an update of contact information, such as current address, telephone and e-mail. When the unsuspecting recipient signs the form and returns it, European City Guide claims this represents an order for an advertisement on a CD-ROM guide and relies on small print on the form to support this claim. The victim of the scam cannot withdraw from the so-called order and European City Guide uses debt collectors to demand payment. Initially this sum is for €800-1,000 but increases as time goes by. I understand some victims have bills for several thousand euro.

The scam is operating on a European basis. European City Guide used to operate from Barcelona before the Catalan authorities, acting on 3,500 complaints from Europe, prosecuted the company and fined it €300,000 in 2002. It now operates from Valencia and has engaged debt collectors called Premium Recovery, based in Switzerland. A web-based campaign against European City Guide has, until now, advised victims not to pay. However, the Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Enterprise, Trade and Employment must give their urgent attention to a new development. Debt collectors for European City Guide are now threatening victims that they will use provisions of the European enforcement order legislation, in effect since November 2005, to force victims to pay. The European enforcement order legislation allows court orders made in one member state to be legally enforced in another.

The advice to victims has changed somewhat since this development. European City Guide can apply to the court in Spain and, if the case is not defended, easily obtain a certificate stating the company is owed a debt. This is sent to the High Court Registry in Ireland and I understand the Master of the High Court may be obliged to enforce the order. Small businesses faced with demands for extortionate payment from the company may find that an order granted in Spain may be enforced in Irish courts.

For victims of the scam, the alternative is to instruct a solicitor and defend the case but this costs a considerable amount. The European enforcement order was never intended to allow scamming companies to engage in cross-border fraud to extract money from small businesses. European legislation offers no protection to businesses and we need new or amended legislation to stop European City Guide operating and to protect its victims.

Hundreds of small businesses and professionals may have already been stung. Until now, they did not have to pay but the European enforcement order legislation may have changed this. I ask the Ministers concerned to see how this can be addressed. I will return to this subject when the Ministers have had the opportunity to examine the case fully.

Mr. Fahey

I am taking this debate on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. On his behalf, I take the opportunity to outline the main features of the instrument which has been referred to by Deputy Gilmore. It should become apparent that the instrument has a particular and laudable purpose and it is regrettable if that purpose is being misused. However, if individuals or companies believe they are being subjected to demands for money which are potentially criminal in nature, they have the right, as have all citizens, to make a complaint to the appropriate law enforcement authorities who are best placed to take this matter further should this be warranted.

The reference is to Council Regulation No. 805/2004 which created a European enforcement order for uncontested claims. Being a regulation, the instrument is binding in its entirety and directly applicable. It has applied fully in this jurisdiction from 21 October 2005. A statutory instrument, SI No. 648 of 2005, also came into operation on that date with the aim of ensuring that the necessary provisions for the good administration of the regulation were put in place. Rules of court were also brought into operation in the Superior Courts, the Circuit Court and the District Court.

The key premise upon which the regulation is built is that by creating a European enforcement order for uncontested claims, judgments in respect of such claims, provided they satisfy certain minimum standards, should be directly enforceable in all member states, Denmark being excluded, without any intermediate proceedings, such as a declaration of enforceability, being required. Thus, if an Irish judgment for an uncontested claim is certified as an EEO, should it be necessary to enforce the judgment in, for example, Germany, the creditor will be able to avail immediately of the enforcement mechanisms which are available in that country. Equally, a German creditor in equivalent circumstances will be able to have immediate recourse to Irish enforcement mechanisms, such as the system of execution offered by the sheriffs or county registrars.

It must be emphasised that the EEO comes in at the end of a process. It does not have a life of its own which is independent from the judgment which is given by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Against that background, the regulation applies to judgments given in respect of uncontested claims where the claim in question is for the payment of a specific sum of money that has fallen due. For the purposes of the regulation, a claim is regarded as uncontested where the debtor has expressly agreed to it by admission; the debtor has not objected to it during the course of the relevant court proceedings, or notwithstanding an initial objection, the debtor has subsequently failed to enter an appearance.

For a judgment to be capable of being certified as an EEO it must be enforceable in the member state where it has been granted, it must comply with certain minimum standards and it must not conflict with certain jurisdiction roles. There is also a special provision to safeguard the right of a consumer debtor to be sued in their member state of domicile.

The minimum standards necessary for a judgment to be certified as an EEO fall under two broad headings, those relating to service and those relating to procedural guarantees concerning the provision of basic information about the claim and the steps necessary to contest it.

The regulation admits of two types of service, service with proof of receipt by the debtor, which would include personal service and service without such proof, which would include postal service where the debtor has an address in the member state where the judgment is being given. Because the latter category of service is seen as having less certainty attached to it than the former, a judgment given following this kind of service can only be certified as an EEO if there is a mechanism in place under national law which permits a defendant to apply for a review of the judgment in certain exceptional circumstances which are set out clearly in the regulation.

On the question of procedural guarantees, the regulation specifies the information which must be provided at the time the relevant court proceedings in respect of the initial claim are instituted, for example, the amount of the claim and an indication as to why the claim is being made. Certain additional information, such as the time of the court hearing and the possibility that judgment may be entered for the creditor if an appearance is not entered or the claim is not contested, must also be provided.

The regulation allows for the fact that, in certain circumstances, it may be necessary to rectify or withdraw an EEO which has already been issued. Furthermore, a judgment certified as an EEO may be challenged on the basis of the review mechanism which has been referred to earlier.

From the above, it should be clear that the regulation contains a number of safeguards which are intended to ensure that it does not operate in an unjust fashion and in itself is not a catalyst for the activities highlighted by the Deputy. While the Deputy's highlighting of the issue to which he referred is to be welcomed, it remains the case that the activities instanced may well be ones which need to be brought to the attention of the appropriate law enforcement authorities who are best placed to deal with any follow-up action.

Asylum Support Services.

Dr. Cowley

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this important matter. I question the reason the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, is treating asylum seekers and the citizens of Kiltimagh, County Mayo, so badly. Inadequate provision has been made for the young male asylum seekers who come to Kiltimagh. The people of Kiltimagh have been let down. The citizens of Kiltimagh have always welcomed visitors to their town, not least asylum seekers, whom they welcomed with open arms. Several families who came to this small rural town in County Mayo were made feel very welcome as members of the community. They quickly integrated with the local community and took part in all the activities and the children attended the schools. They have become part and parcel of the place. The proof of this integration was when the entire community banded together to support a family threatened with deportation. Some members of the community accompanied the family when they were deported to the UK and stayed with them to support them.

The centre for asylum seekers in Kiltimagh was reclassified from family to single person accommodation in January 2006. The centre consists of two buildings, the Railway Hotel and an annexe located on the opposite side of the road. It was intended to place males in one building and females in the other. Following further consideration, the reception and integration agency agreed recently that the families residing at the Kiltimagh centre will be allowed to remain there until at least the end of the current school year. However, arrangements were made to allow for the accommodation of some males at the centre.

I refer to a reply from the Minister to a parliamentary question asked last month which stated that the RIA would initially make up to ten placements in the annexe at this location and would monitor the arrangement on an ongoing basis. At present there are more than ten young males staying at the annexe. There were eight and six more arrived in the past two weeks, a total of 14. People are concerned that this number of ten has already been exceeded. The street where both facilities are located, James Street, is home to at least 14 elderly persons and many widows and widowers. A psychiatric outreach community facility accommodating psychiatric patients is also on the same street. There are fire safety questions about the Railway Hotel and the annexe. The effect of bringing so many single males into the street is seriously questioned. The maximum number of ten people staying in the annexe has been exceeded and it is feared this number will be exceeded to a greater degree.

Why are reception centres being closed in places such as Limerick, where there are many facilities, and this centre remains open with single men living in a street in a rural town which lacks the facilities they require. It is almost as bad for those men as if they were in prison. They deserve better. They cannot work and they receive less than €20 a week. All they can do is walk up and down on the street. It is not fair to them. They came to this country to get help from us, yet we treat them like this. It is not right.

The Minister stated that discussions took place with local community groups, but minimal discussions took place and the people of Kiltimagh have experienced difficulties communicating with the RIA. The Minister's reply contains a threat that the centre may be closed if the new category of asylum seeker is not accepted as this would have economic consequences for the town of Kiltimagh. The accommodation centre is of little relevance to the local community from an economic point of view. The centre is owned by a company based in County Kildare. Only one of the employees lives in the Kiltimagh area and the others live elsewhere or are non-nationals. There are no local suppliers of produce or services to the centre.

From a Kiltimagh perspective, unless the clients accommodated in the centre are acceptable to the local residents and contribute to the way of life in Kiltimagh, the centre should be closed. The local community would prefer it to close than accommodate single people in such large numbers. It is not conducive to the proper development of the town and is upsetting the balance of the community. The Kiltimagh community is welcoming and families with children have integrated with it. However to inject so many single men into a community that has nothing for them is unfair on the men and on the community. I hope the Minister will examine this situation. He has said the community would accommodate ten people and that it would be monitored, but there was no monitoring and in a short space of time the numbers exceeded ten. I ask the Minister to explain the position.

Mr. Fahey

The Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers and currently has a portfolio of 65 centres across the State for this purpose. To address the reduction in numbers and the change in profile of asylum seekers, the RIA embarked on a programme of downsizing its accommodation portfolio. The Kiltimagh centre has accommodated 80 asylum seekers in the recent past. The number in the centre today is approximately half of this figure. The Deputy should note that the RIA has, since its inception, reclassified centres as circumstances require as a normal part of its operations.

The ongoing RIA downsizing saw the closure in 2005 of 15 centres with a combined capacity of 833 beds. To date in 2006, four centres with a combined capacity of approximately 270 beds have been closed and further closures and reclassifications are planned. Overall, the current downsizing has led to the closure of two accommodation centres in County Mayo. Only two centres now remain in County Mayo, one in Kiltimagh and the other in Ballyhaunis.

The RIA considered the centre in Kiltimagh suitable for possible reclassification from family to single person accommodation. As part of the reclassification of this centre the RIA intended to relocate its families to other centres where they could benefit from special facilities for children and young people which have been put in place, including pre-school facilities for very young children. However, following discussions, the RIA agreed that the families with school going children who currently reside at the centre would be allowed to remain there at least until the end of the current school year.

The Kiltimagh centre consists of two buildings, the Railway Hotel and an annex, which is located across the road. The RIA has, thus far, allocated a total of 17 males to this building. The Minister never promised, as the Deputy has alleged, that a maximum of ten male asylum seekers would be sent to Kiltimagh. If the Deputy had cared to check the replies to the numerous questions the Minister recently answered on this topic, he would have seen that the Minister said: "the RIA will shortly make up to ten placements in the annex at this location and will monitor the arrangements on an ongoing basis". That is what was done and, having done so, the RIA has only moved this week a further six male asylum seekers to the centre. The ages of these asylum seekers vary from early 20s to over 40. The RIA has also moved two female asylum seekers to the centre.

The reception and integration agency will continue to monitor the situation in Kiltimagh. There are no reports of difficulties arising. However, the reality is that the State must be in a position to accommodate single asylum seekers and must use its existing accommodation for this purpose. If the State determined that the Kiltimagh centre was not suitable for this purpose it would have no choice but to withdraw from the contract. This would result in the loss of 16, mostly full time, jobs at that centre. I am sure the Deputy would not wish that outcome.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.15 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 21 March 2006.