Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Jul 1951

Vol. 39 No. 17

Post Office (Amendment) Bill, 1951—Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Childers)

This Bill was introduced in the Dáil by the late Government and we regarded it as, generally speaking, an agreed measure. It is purely an amending Bill, designed to remove defects in existing Post Office legislation. The administration of the Post Office is largely governed by the Post Office Act of 1908 which I think members of the House will agree was an excellent piece of legislation, in that it has required very few amendments since that date, in spite of the many changes which have taken place in the methods of communication, postal delivery and postal administration generally.

The Bill proposes a number of changes to the Act of 1908, to enable the administration to conform with modern conditions, and some of the sections are retrospective in character. A memorandum has been issued to the members of the Seanad already, but Senators may like me to deal in some detail with the principal sections.

In regard to Section 2, the 1908 Act gave general power to the Treasury, as it was in that day, to fix by warrant the rates of postage and other sums to be charged on postal packets. There were certain restrictions in regard to the maximum amounts for certain classes of postal packets, including letters, postcards, book packets (now called printed packets), inland newspapers and newspapers for places outside the British Isles. The restrictions were gradually removed by subsequent legislation, but it has been found that when the postage rates on inland newspapers were revised on the 1st July, 1948, in fact that was contrary to the terms of the 1908 Act. Clause 2 enables increases, over and above the increased rate, to be levied on inland newspapers. Section 2 rectifies that position.

Section 3 deals with a similar limitation that existed in regard to the postage to be charged on a newspaper posted to countries, other than Great Britain, outside the State. Again, it has been necessary to increase these charges and so Section 3 rectifies the position and is retrospective in character, in that Section 3 should have been an amendment to the Act before the charges for newspapers were increased.

Section 4 is very simple. It extends the special postage rate for books and papers for the use of the blind, to sound recordings, plates for embossing Braille, and other articles specially adapted for the use of the blind. It will be of certain advantage and help blind people, by enabling them to receive every sort of apparatus designed to assist them to read, at the postage rate formerly accorded only to printed matter.

Section 5 was introduced because the value of money has decreased and it is essential to increase the maximum value of a postal order from 21/- to a higher level and also to increase, in conformity with current costs, the poundage to be levied for the issue of postal orders.

Section 6 is a particularly valuable amendment, as it will assist the business community to extend their method of advertising by providing a business reply service for which a great demand exists and which has proved very successful in other countries. Firms can send out an unstamped card, envelope, folder or label of a special pattern which can be returned through the post unstamped. An appropriate charge is made for that service which enables firms to advertise by circular.

Section 7 is purely to bring up to date the position in regard to customs examination. Under the present conventions parcels can be opened in the ordinary way by the customs authorities. Under this section, if a "Green Label" is attached to a letter packet that indicates that the sender is willing to have it opened for customs purposes. This enables letter packets containing goods which may be regarded as dutiable to be passed with ease to the customs authorities.

Section 8 is, again, in accordance with modern practice. It extends to aircraft the obligations and duties imposed on ships in regard to mail to see that mail on board ship is duly collected and returned to the post office on the arrival of the ship. These regulations are now going to apply to aircraft.

Section 9 deals with an anomaly that was not, apparently, changed by all the various legislation adapted to our Administration as the result of the coming into operation of the Constitution. At the moment, by an extraordinary anomaly, newspapers, in order to comply with regulations, must be registered with the post office in London. It is proposed from now on that it will be sufficient to have them registered at the General Post Office in Dublin in order that they can be sent through the post at the newspaper rate of transmission.

Section 10 is purely an amending section dealing with the powers of the Post Office to organise a service of cash on delivery in connection with parcels. The House will be interested to hear that this service is very little availed of, although I thought it would be very useful to certain classes of business people. This is purely an amending section.

Section 11 deals with the method of fixing foreign telephone fees. At present, the Department is required to issue a statutory regulation for this purpose. The fees depend largely on payments and terminal credits which have to be made to the country through which the calls actually pass. These charges are not within our control. Therefore, it is regarded as anomalous that we should have to fix them by statutory regulation. It is proposed in future to insert a notice in Iris Oifigiúil if any changes are made in these fees.

Section 12 of the Bill is designed to prevent the unauthorised use of the signs of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs.

Section 13 deals with telephone offences, nuisance calls, false ambulance calls and grossly offensive or annoying conduct in the use of the telephone. The powers which at present can be evoked in respect of such offences are very limited. Apparently, at the moment, if a subscriber on a private phone commits any offences of this kind, he cannot be prosecuted under any law which would make prosecution easy. This section is designed to improve that position.

Section 14 prohibits unauthorised imitation of post office stamps, envelopes, etc., and is designed to protect the public and the interest of the Post Office and its authority.

These are, in brief, the main provisions of this Bill and, as I said at the opening, it is a Bill purely of an amending type. It has been agreed to by all Parties in the Dáil and I hope it will have the support of the Seanad.

Mr. Douglas

I have read the White Paper and listened to the introductory speech of the Minister and I think he is correct when he says this might be regarded as an agreed measure.

It is exactly, however, the type of Bill to which I have consistently and persistently objected. As it is, as the Minister found it on his desk, I will not accuse him, but I think this is a suitable opportunity to say again that the time has come when we should show a little independence in this country and that when we find it necessary to apply a British Act as a basis of a Department or its authority, we should redraft the Act, amend it, so that within a reasonable time it would be possible for anyone to secure a complete set of the Irish Acts and look into them. If a member of the Dáil, or Seanad wanted to go into any of these matters he would have easy access to the Irish Acts in the Library, but he would not have such easy access to the British Acts. This is, as explained by the Minister, a simple measure, but it had to be sent out with an explanatory memorandum, because nobody could understand what it was all about without that memorandum.

Mr. Childers

Least of all the Minister.

Mr. Douglas

Least of all the Minister. I have heard a case made by my legal friends that it is very much in the interests of the legal profession to have amending legislation, but I do not think that that could apply to this Bill, because it is largely a Bill dealing with administration. I urge the Minister, if he has any influence with the Government—I failed to get previous Governments to effect it, even though they saw my point—to try to have Bills, amended as in this case, reprinted in full. There seems to be some influence in the Civil Service, amongst the Departments, or in the draftsman's office, that you take a British Act and proceed to amend it, and that in cases like this, where the 1908 Act is the basis of a Department like the Post Office, they just take the 1908 Act substantially and amend it. It seems to me that it would be much more desirable—it would cost very little more beyond the cost of printing—to reprint the whole Act.

One of the things I would like to refer to is the prosecution of people for using the telephone in an undesirable way. I do not know whether the Minister seeks facilities for listening to telephone communications to see whether they are what he terms undesirable, obscene or whatever it may be. If he does not do that, then I do not know how he is going to prosecute. If, on the other hand, he does this thing, I do not know how he will identify the person so using the telephone. Is it the purpose of this section to give added facilities for prosecution, or does it, on the other hand, propose the introduction of a censorship? I cannot see how the Minister will decide what a conversation is unless he listens to it and, if it means just an extension of censorship, then I do not think it is a matter to which we should lightly agree.

Mr. Childers

Perhaps, lest other Senators might be inclined to go into a discussion on this matter, it would be better if I explained it at this stage. Under the section of this Bill dealing with prosecutions, such prosecutions will be taken on the complaint of subscribers. There is no question whatever in any sense of an extension of censorship which does not exist.

Mr. O'Farrell

The Minister has replied to a question asked by Senator Douglas regarding the one section that troubled me. This is, in the main, an administrative Bill, but there is a penalty clause in it which the Minister has not explained. We are going to increase and extend powers of prosecution, but we are not told in what way the offender will be identified. The Minister has hinted that a prosecution will only be taken on the complaint of the subscriber, but, to identify the offender, will some section of the Post Office staff be appointed to listen in, even continuously, to certain telephone lines to here what is going on? We have no clear indication from the Minister as to what will constitute an offensive message, nor do we know what is meant by an obscene message or an indecent message or what might constitute a message of a menacing character. These are definitions which ought to be very clear.

We ought also to know what the nature of the prosecution will be. If complaints are made by subscribers, will the Post Office investigate them or will it set up a detective staff and listening-in posts? We have always understood up to this that telephone conversations were private conversations and that the staff did not bother to listen in to them, even if they had time to do so. We should be very careful not to inaugurate powers of prosecution too loosely or to put something in a Bill of a type which would be undesirable. I would like an assurance from the Minister that they will act only on complaints by subscribers. I do not assume that they would do otherwise but the danger is there that it may be done sometime by some officials.

Professor Stanford

I would first like to take this opportunity of welcoming the Minister on his first appearance in the Seanad. I had not an opportunity on the previous Bill. Might I say, as a personal note, that I particularly welcome his graceful tribute to his predecessor? If that innovation—I think to a certain degree it is an innovation—is continued, our meetings in this House will become more cordial and more harmonious. In the three years in which I have been a Senator I have noticed from time to time that the debates were often spoiled by an effort to grab the credit at the expense of someone else. The Minister has shown no sign of that.

There are some general points in connection with this Bill that I would like to refer to. The first is the increase in the postal rates. I should like to ask the Minister whether that is an international increase, that is, whether every country in the International Postal Union has raised the rates on letters, printed papers, and so on, or whether we have done that alone. It is a little disquieting to find the cost of living creeping up in this way also. Another ½d. on the printed paper rate will mean a good deal to business firms, I imagine, and even to poor Senators who are sending out belated notices to their constituents it will mean a few halfpence, again perhaps the wrong way. At the same time, with the 25 per cent. surcharge on telephones, which is, of course, more relevant to the other Bill, it is becoming serious that the cost of living from the postal service point of view is steadily creeping up.

I notice in to-day's paper what I think is a welcome innovation. If it is not an innovation, I still welcome it. There was an attractive and noticeable advertisement to the effect that the rates on printed paper went up on Monday. Perhaps it was in yesterday's paper; I think it was in to-day's. Hitherto, the only way I have learned that the rates on letters had gone up was the unpleasant business of paying a fine to the postman and realising that many of my friends had been paying fines on my letters for insufficient stamping.

I would like to congratulate the Department on that advertisement and to hope that in future, when these rates go up, we will be noticeably informed. Perhaps it is my own stupidity, but I think the tendency in the past has been to leave it to the public to find out for themselves.

There is one other matter that, since we have a new Minister, I would like to mention, although it is an old topic. It is the design of our postage stamps. It has been mentioned before, but I do not think the present Minister has been approached about it. The fact, as some of us see it, is that the designs on our coins, which are restricted to circulation within the Twenty-Six Counties, more or less, are excellent, but the designs on our stamps, which go over the whole world, are sometimes poor, generally mediocre and in a few cases really good. I would emphasise to the Minister that one of the best and cheapest advertisements that the country can get is in its postal stamps. It costs the Government nothing more, I imagine, to produce a good stamp rather than a bad stamp and every nation in the world sooner or later will see that stamp and appreciate its value.

I would like to emphasise the urgent need for good taste in the subject matter, design and colour of our stamps. Inferior stamps suggest an inferior country, not merely to philatelists and school children, but to every perceptive person. In urging this, may I ask the Minister one or two questions about the choice of designs for stamps? How are designs invited and submitted? I have never seen an advertisement to that effect. I do not think this is out of order. I will stop in two minutes.

Mr. Childers

It is completely out of order.

Professor Stanford

The second question is, who selects the designs for the stamps and are there enough expert artists on the selection board? I will conclude by urging the Minister to turn his attention to this matter which is a matter of the honour of the country and a genuine cultural matter. It is by very small things like this that Ireland may be judged in Japan, New Zealand or Australia when more fulsome and more expensive forms of advertisement simply do not reach those countries at all.

Mr. Quirke

It is generally accepted that this is an agreed measure. There was practically no discussion on it in the Dáil. In connection with the section on which Senator O'Farrell raised the question, I take it that it is merely making provision, where possible, to prove that someone used offensive language over the phone or did any of the other things covered in the section. When I read the section I thought, just as other Senators did, how would it be possible to prove it. On thinking over it I realised that there is such a thing as a wire recorder which many business houses have attached to a telephone, which records every word you say. That would be one way of proving it. Personally, I am not interested in the matter. I have no enemies who would be abusing me over the telephone. It is the fellow who rings up asking me for the loan of a £1 that I would like to deal with.

There is one other thing I would like to say to the Minister, at the request of several Senators belonging to various Parties. It is that a regular telephone booth be provided where the telephone, number 61147, now exists.

Mr. Douglas

Is it legal to use a wire recorder attached to your telephone?

Mr. Childers

I do not know. I have great sympathy with Senator Douglas's observation as to what might be described as the general "Irishising" of our legislation, consolidation, and so forth. A certain amount of that has been effected, both by the last Government and the Government before that, but I can hardly deal with that on the occasion of this Bill, except to express the hope that one day we will have so little urgent legislation to pass that we might have a whole year in which the Dáil and the Seanad, apart from financial business, can deal entirely with consolidation and reenactments. I can hardly foresee that occurring very soon.

Senator Stanford made some observations in regard to the increases in postal charges. They are not the result of an international convention except to the extent that they have become part of an agreement between ourselves and another State or group of States in regard to increases in charges. They are based on our own financial needs. I could tell the Senator that postal charges have increased steadily since the war in all countries and similar increases are inevitable here. The postal service is estimated to have lost in the financial year, 1950-51, £474,000, which is made up in this way: profit on telephones, £92,000; loss on telegraphs, £250,000, loss on the postal service, £316,000. So it was found necessary to increase the postal charges. We very much regretted it, but I might add that most of the postal charges, with some exceptions, have not yet gone up by an amount representing the full increase in the cost of living since 1939, partly because of improved methods of transmission and a larger volume of mail being carried over an existing system which eliminates the necessity for making absolutely proportionate increases in charges. I did not like to have to introduce these charges, but they were announced to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs by the Minister for Finance before the Budget and for some reason or other delay took place in their being put into operation. I leave to the imagination of the House the reasons for that. Senator O'Farrell can be assured that there is no star chamber legislation involved in this Bill at all.

There is the ordinary method of dealing with these offences, such as the misuse of the telephone. There is the existing law. It in no way implies that there can be a licence given to the Post Office authorities to listen-in to calls.

In regard to the point raised by Senator Stanford about the design of stamps, in some cases a competition is held. I may say that I am not fully briefed in regard to stamps because they do not arise on this Bill. I can assure the Seanad that we consider an alteration of stamp designs from time to time. I am aware that they are a very good form of advertising for this country. I think members of the Seanad of all Parties will agree that there is a case for seeing what we can do with regard to a permanent issue of stamps. I think that some variation is desirable. In one group we have the Four Provinces surrounded by a shamrock and in another a sword is depicted. There are great difficulties in regard to printing and designing and in regard to the final design for use in making the stamp. We always have to negotiate with the Department of Finance in this matter.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Quirke

With regard to the taking of the next stage of the Bill, there was more or less agreement that we would take it this day fortnight, I overlooked the fact that the Dáil would have held its last meeting before we could have dealt with the Bill. If, however, someone were to put in an amendment to the Bill, and it was carried, it would mean that the Dáil would have to be recalled. In view of the fact that this is an agreed measure, I think the House might agree to take all stages to-night.

Mr. Douglas

I am not quite sure as to what was arranged. It is fairly obvious from the debate that there is not likely to be any amendment to the Bill. While saying that, I could not at all agree with the reasons given by Senator Quirke for taking all stages to-night—that someone might put in an amendment and that the Dáil would have to be recalled if all stages were not given now. It is not likely, however, that any amendments will be put in.

Agreed, that the remaining Stages of the Bill be taken now.

Sections 1 to 5 put and agreed to.

SECTION 6.

Question proposed: "That Section 6 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Douglas

On the section, there is power taken with regard to changing rates. Can the Minister tell me what exactly is the position with regard to registered postal rates? Apparently, the position is that you pay an agreed amount and that the Minister may, if he thinks fit, pay you if you have lost the whole packet, but that if only a portion of the packet be lost you do not get anything. There is a certain amount of dissatisfaction in that position. I was told it was due to the fact that we were working under a position in which it was his Majesty's service, and that you could not have any legal right against his Majesty. We have not got his Majesty now. I am anxious to know what is the position in regard to one's legal rights against the State.

Mr. Childers

I am not sure how this relates to the Bill. I am advised that it lies within the Minister's discretion to pay compensation for loss of a registered packet, and that it is invariably done if proof of the sending of the packet can be given, and if proof of non-delivery by the receiver is admitted by the Post Office and further that the regulations with regard to sealing the envelope have been carried out. It is a matter of ministerial discretion. Invariably, compensation is granted if the regulations are carried out.

Mr. Douglas

I suggest that the time has come when the power vested in the Minister should be amended, and that there should be the right to sue the Minister for the loss sustained. The public pay insurance in the case of these registered packets, but they find that some one has pilfered a quarter of the packet, and that they can get nothing.

Mr. Childers

We pay even on the partial loss of a packet.

Mr. Douglas

Some years ago I had a letter stating that that was not done. I have not got the letter with me.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 7 to 15, inclusive, put and agreed to.

Schedule and Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.

Question—"That the Bill do now pass"—put and agreed to.