I wish to raise an issue with the Chairman.
Business of the Joint Committee.
In private session or in public session?
I ask permission to raise the issue in public session if possible.
The Deputy has permission to raise the issue in public session.
The issue is the deterioration of the service provided by An Post, especially in the Dublin North-East constituency. A GP called me recently and said that he receives letters only on a weekly basis. Some other people get a delivery only every second day. Do I have the Chairman's permission to raise this issue, which I consider so important as to raise it in public session?
I ask Deputy Brady to defer this matter until the committee deals with a matter pertaining to the Joint Committee on European Affairs, Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny. It has forwarded legislative proposals for the committee. The clerk has circulated a list with a short explanatory note on each outstanding matter. The committee must make a formal decision on each item. Is it agreed to scrutinise COM (2005) 117? Agreed. Is it agreed that no further scrutiny is required for COM (2004) 669, 724, 764, 783, 797, 811, 864, COM (2005) 36, 43, 86, 114, 121, 148, 176, 186 and 187? Agreed. Is it agreed to note COM (2004) 675, 746 and 758? Agreed. In addition, COM (2004) 785, COM (2005) 36, COM (2005) 112 and COM (2005) 210 have been forwarded for members to note.
I welcome Mr. Brian Cassidy and Mr. Michael Lyons from Cork City Council. Before the committee begins hearing from these witnesses, Deputy Martin Brady may resume on the important issue to raise.
I wish to discuss the deterioration of the postal service, particularly in the north-east of Dublin. I have to attend another meeting, so I will be brief. People are not getting the delivery service that is required. In some cases deliveries are made every second or third day. A GP in my area telephoned me to say that he receives deliveries on a weekly basis. His deliveries would include results of tests from hospitals and so on. The slow delivery of such things could put people's lives at risk.
The chief executive of An Post has been contacted on my behalf. His excuse for the poor delivery service in the area was the level of sick leave. The operational manager, whom I contacted, stated that the problem was staff shortages, and that the poor service could be expected to continue for some time. No forecast was given for improvement. If a company such as An Post is content to give this level of service to customers, it should be advertised accordingly in newspapers and customers should be told that service cannot be provided. This would enable customers to make alternative arrangements.
This is a serious matter. I do not know when representatives from An Post will appear at this committee again, but I suggest that the Minister responsible should be consulted. The committee could ask him to send somebody to investigate An Post's operations. Restrictive practices are evident, with a row ongoing between the unions and An Post. The company management tell a different story from the unions. The public cannot continue to be caught in the middle of such a situation for much longer. An Post has a responsibility to provide a service. If a proper service cannot be supplied, it should state this.
With the Deputy's permission, the committee will contact ComReg through the secretariat which is responsible for monitoring the standard of delivery, specifically next-day delivery, of An Post.
I understand what is the problem. The committee should ask a representative of the management of An Post to appear before it. An all-day meeting would not be required to sort out this issue, although a meeting is required. If necessary, a representative from the unions can also appear. I have no problem with that. Questions can then be asked of both simultaneously, or nearly so.
I am aware of similar situations to those described by Deputy Martin Brady. I find it difficult to get answers to the issue through parliamentary questions. The regulator is a new persona involved in the business, and it is creating difficulty for members to get answers to questions that should be straightforward. Deputy Martin Brady has probably already gone down this route. It is difficult for members to get answers to specific questions, like the situation referred to, in the House, as allegedly the Minister has no responsibility to the House. I contend that he does. If the committee wishes to bring in the Minister at the same time as representatives from An Post and the unions, it should do so. Representatives from An Post management certainly need to be spoken with.
I support Deputy Martin Brady. I have sought to have the subject of An Post brought up on the Adjournment debate in the House today. This includes the issue that Deputy Martin Brady has raised. At present, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions is meeting and seriously discussing abandoning national partnership agreements because a major semi-State body is not prepared to honour a ratified agreement from two and a half years ago. The treatment of An Post pensioners by management adds to the ire. The person who holds ultimate responsibility for this mess is the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey. The Taoiseach also holds responsibility.
For not delivering the post?
Yes. The chief executive of An Post came in here and I read to him a list of rosters and so. He ignored me and the Minister did not respond to the issue at all. It is ultimately an important national service and semi-State body. The Minister has a grave responsibility, especially if it ends up in worse difficulty.
Have you Member's time at the Adjournment debate tonight?
I will have to check that.
If you have you will have five minutes.
If I have that time.
Is there any way you could give Deputy Martin Brady a minute of your time?
It is possible if it comes up.
We are continuing committee business until the middle of July. We are not going on any trips and we will be busy.
I thank Deputy Broughan for his support. I agree with him on the An Post pensioners. This is a knock-on effect where an agreement has not been honoured and pensioners have not been paid. That is a separate issue. The Chairman is in business and if he had a manager the manager would be responsible for running the company. If this manager cannot do it, that person would have to be let go and somebody competent put in their place.
There is no time to bring in representatives from An Post before the recess to get answers to these questions. I suggest that the clerk make contact with the company based on what has been said. The Adjournment debate tonight can be used. ComReg will be also contacted to investigate the whole issue. Will Deputy M. Brady supply details to the clerk?
Yes. Another problem exists of which I am sure Deputy Broughan is aware. When An Post delivers, it is at 3 p.m. or during the day when people are out. The letters are left lying on hallway floors. The house can then become prone to robbery as a result.
If the situation has not improved, a date will be fixed in September to examine it.
I thank the Chairman for giving me the opportunity to raise the issue.
Will the Chairman indicate instead that he intends to examine the matter at the earliest opportunity? If a specific date is mentioned two or three months from now, people will feel that it may never happen. If the Chairman indicates that he intends to investigate at an early date, it would be better.
We will change that form of words.
We cannot have a stand-off indefinitely where unions state they will not meet the committee and the An Post management has an arrogant attitude. This matter must be resolved and somebody must do this. I agree with Deputy Broughan. The Minister should send someone to An Post to investigate its operations.
The joint committee will discuss the matter with the Minister. On the Adjournment debate in the House this evening, the Deputy will take a minute of the time generously offered to him by Deputy Broughan.