Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Dec 1963

Vol. 57 No. 4

Telephone Capital Bill, 1963 (Certified Money Bill) — Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Hilliard)

The purpose of this Telephone Capital Bill is, briefly, to authorise the Minister for Finance to advance further moneys, up to a limit of 30 million pounds, for continued development of the telephone service.

As Senators are no doubt aware, expenditure on the telephone service falls under two heads. The cost of operation and maintenance is borne out of moneys provided annually by the Oireachtas under the Post Office Vote, but extension and development of the system are covered by funds provided under Telephone Capital Acts.

These Acts empower the Minister for Finance to issue moneys out of the Central Fund for development of the telephone service, and empower him also to borrow in order to meet or repay the issues so made. The Acts do not of themselves authorise expenditure, but merely ensure the continued availability of capital. Expenditure is authorised, and issues from the Central Fund are made, on foot of annual estimates approved by the Minister for Finance.

The moneys required for repayment of the sums borrowed are provided annually under sub-head G of the Post Office Vote.

The latest Telephone Capital Act, which was passed in 1960, authorised the Minister for Finance to issue a total of £10 million for telephone development. This amount, together with a balance of £805,000 on hands from previous legislation, was intended to cover requirements for about 5 years. Owing to the rapid rise in the public demand for telephone service, however, it was necessary to increase the capital allocations each year, and during the three financial years ended 31st March last £8,250,000 was spent.

During this period, 45,000 new subscribers' lines were connected to the system, 44,000 miles of new trunk circuits were added and over 230 kiosks were erected. Some 130 new exchanges were opened and the capacity of 460 others was increased. Subscriber trunk dialling was extended to most of the major automatic exchanges and this facility is now available to 73 per cent of all subscribers. Additional cross-channel circuits were provided and direct transatlantic telephone circuits were established between this country and North America. During this period also a very considerable amount of engineering work devolved on the telephone side of my Department in connection with the setting-up of the Irish television service.

This expansion and development was, of course, far greater than that of any previous three year period. The progress achieved, however, was not sufficient to cope with the tremendous growth that took place in the public demand for telephone service. As a result the number of applicants waiting for telephones has grown, and during peak working hours, especially in the summer season this year, delays were encountered in effecting calls on many routes, and even the automatic system suffered a serious amount of congestion at times.

The principal cause of these difficulties was shortage of equipment and this was in turn due to the inadequacy of capital available for investment in the system. Although the allocations made in the last three financial years far exceeded those envisaged when the 1960 Act was passed, they were insufficient for the needs of the service, that is to say, they were insufficient to provide all the additional plant required to meet the exceptional growth in demand. Still more did they fall short of what was needed to allow of the timely installation of adequate space capacity in exchanges, trunk circuits and subscribers' cables.

The telephone service is peculiarly dependent on this kind of advance planning and provision, because of the long period which any major expansion or development of the system necessarily takes. Delivery terms for much of the equipment required are long, and installation programmes are rendered rather uncertain by such factors as site and building difficulties and technical problems involved in adapting standard equipment to suit existing networks.

Much of the vital work which was planned as far back as 1959 is only now maturing and schemes for expansion that are at present on the drawing boards will not become effective for several years ahead.

My Department is now faced with the formidable task of bringing the telephone service up to a satisfactory standard in the shortest possible time and of establishing adequate reserves of plant capacity to cater for future growth.

The £30 millions capital expenditure provided for under this Bill represents our estimate of the cost of the works programme which it is hoped to carry out in the next five years. The amount involved, which is almost as much as has been spent on telephone development since the foundation of the State, will give some idea of the work necessary to bring the telephone service up to a generally satisfactory standard. This work includes the connection of 115,000 new subscribers' lines, conversion of several hundred manually-operated exchanges to automatic working, the opening of an auxiliary trunk exchange in Dublin, the erection of 600 street kiosks and the expansion of trunk circuiting in order to overtake arrears, to establish a no-delay service and to cater for expansion. It is hoped also to provide a new cross-channel link.

The expenditure is estimated to be as follows: £16¼ millions on subscribers' exchange lines and apparatus, £7½ millions on trunk circuits, £4¾ millions on equipment of new exchanges and extension of existing exchanges, £1 million on buildings and £½ a million on increased stockholdings.

The work involved in this programme is immense, and considerable problems will have to be overcome in order to complete it. Provision of the new exchanges required will involve the acquisition of hundreds of sites and the design, erection and equipment of buildings. The laying of cables for trunk circuits and subscribers' needs gives rise to special problems which demand a high degree of engineering skill and long experience of telecommunications, which is a field of continuous change and development.

The substantial works programme involved will necessitate a considerable increase in engineering staff. As many Senators will be aware, there is a general international shortage of electrical engineers and we have been unable in the past to get all those we need. Special action is being taken to overcome this problem, and to prevent its becoming a serious obstacle to the success of our works programme.

We have decided to create a new sub-professional grade to take the more routine work from our professional engineers and free them for higher quality work. We have also decided in principle to introduce a scholarship scheme which will enable young men to attend full-time day courses in order to acquire professional engineering qualifications. My Department has been building up its workman force progressively in recent years and with the co-operation of the Vocational Education Committees it has made arrangements to increase the annual intake of youths to be trained for the skilled grades and to intensify the training. Some of these measures will bear fruit only in the long term. To relieve our problem in the short term we hope to give out as much work as possible to contractors and this may include the planning as well as the execution of major jobs.

As a five year period is needed to bring the service to the desired state of efficiency and to cater fully for traffic and for persons requiring telephones, it will not be possible in the earlier years of that period to meet in full all demands on the service. The most urgent part of the development programme is to expand the trunk network which suffered more than any other part of the system from the capital restrictions of the past. I have directed my Department to give special priority to this work, even though the connection of new telephones for a large number of applicants will have to be deferred in consequence. I am fully satisfied that this course, the object of which is to bring the service to existing subscribers up to a good standard without avoidable delay, is the proper one to follow in present circumstances. Part of our aim over the five year period is to increase greatly the rate of connection of subscribers. We intend to achieve this as quickly as possible, but the present build up of trunk and exchange capacity is an essential preliminary for this purpose.

I should like to say a word about the financial position of the telephone service. The assets created by expenditure on telephone development provide full security for the capital invested by the State. Furthermore, the telephone service fully remunerates the capital invested in it. In the commercial accounts prepared in respect of each financial year the revenue earned by the telephone service, which is surrendered to the Exchequer, is shown as income. Against this are charged expenditure incurred on the operation and maintenance of the service, interest on the total capital employed, and the provisions in respect of depreciation and superannuation. Having provided for these charges, the telephone service heretofore has shown a surplus over expenditure. If the existing rate of return on capital is maintained over the period covered by the Telephone Capital Bill, the telephone service will, over the same period, have contributed to the Exchequer over £11 million by way of depreciation and surplus and approximately £9.25 million by way of interest on capital.

I should add, finally, that although the sum being provided is a considerable one by any standard, much more will remain to be done even after it has been expended. Our ultimate aim is a fully automatic service, adequate reserves of exchange equipment and circuits to cater for growth, alternative routes to all the main routes and the means to connect new subscribers without delay. The present programme will not carry us as far as this but it aims at eliminating the waiting list and providing a thoroughly satisfactory service.

Mr. L'Estrange

As the Minister has said, this Bill is to authorise the Minister for Finance to advance further sums up to a limit of £30 million for continued development of the telephone services over the next five years. We on this side of the House welcome the Bill because the telephone service is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity and it has been such for many years. As the Minister has stated, it is a service that is paying its way. The Minister has pointed out that the assets created by expenditure on telephone development provide full security for the capital invested by the State and, furthermore, that the telephone service fully remunerates the capital invested in it. We acknowledge that the money is well spent.

There is the further consideration that for a long number of years the telephone service has provided good employment for our own people, a factor which is of great importance in this country. If we are to hold our own in the progressive and competitive world that lies ahead we must certainly move with the times. Improvement and further development of our economy cannot take place without the necessary money being provided for them. We are prepared to support the expenditure of the extra £30 million needed for this development work over the next five years.

We all sincerely hope that we will have a more efficient service in a few years' time. We would all like to have the position in which telephones would be available practically on demand and that applicants would not have to wait, for years in some cases, as happens at the present time. I suppose we may have to wait a few years before we arrive at that happy stage.

Those in public life receive a steady stream of correspondence from constituents complaining bitterly about inability to get telephones installed and about unsatisfactory service and long delays in making calls after the telephones have been installed.

The Government have been in office for seven years and the position in regard to the telephone service seems to be much worse now that it was six or seven years ago. I claim that that is due to the inability of the Government to tackle the position as it should have been tackled and also to the fact that the Minister's predecessor, in 1958 and 1959, cut the expenditure from £1.6 million in 1957 to £1.1 million in 1958. There was a slight increase, to £1.4 million in 1959 and a further cut, to £1.3 million in 1960. The Minister is not to be blamed for what his predecessor did. We should give credit where credit is due. He definitely seems to be tackling the situation at the present time.

It is gratifying that the Minister did not make the charge in this House that he made in the Dáil, which is a relief to Senators on this side of the House. He claimed in the Dáil that all the trouble was due to the fact that there was not enough money spent on these services during the 1950s. He did not repeat that falsehood here. I suppose Deputy Dillon gave him his answer in the Dáil.

Mr. Hilliard

Of course, that is not so. The Senator is making a mistake.

Mr. L'Estrange

You did not repeat it here today.

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator will address the Chair.

Mr. Hilliard

I did not like to interrupt the Senator. If he reads what I said he will find that I said that most of our trouble was due to shortage of capital.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

In the past. I think the Minister said in the other House "in the 1950s".

Mr. Hilliard

And in the 1950s— that is the past.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

He said here "in the past".

Mr. Hilliard

The 1950s is not the past?

Mr. Fitzpatrick

He said "in the 1950s" in the Dáil. He did not say it today.

Mr. Hilliard

I said "in the past".

Mr. L'Estrange

We do not want to blame the Government for what happened during the war but it would be no harm to point out that in 1946, under the Telephone Capital Acts, £100,000 was made available; in 1947, £153,000; in 1948, £335,000. There was a change of Government and in 1949 the late Deputy Keyes, who was Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, increased the amount from £335,000 to £1,225,000—four times the amount that had been spent in the previous year. In 1950, the amount spent was £1,250,000; in 1951, £1,800,000. The Book of Estimates provided for expenditure of £2,600,000 in 1952. There was a change of Government then. Fianna Fáil came into power and there was a reduction from £2,600,000 to £1,950,000 in 1953. In 1954, there was a further cut by the Fianna Fáil Government of another £900,000, bringing the figure to £1,050,000.

There was a change of Government and, in 1955, the figure was increased to £1,400,000. In 1956, which we are told at times was a disastrous year, there was a further increase to £1,750,000 and, in 1957, the figure was £1,650,000. Fianna Fáil were back in office and in the following year the figure was cut by £500,000 to £1,150,000. In 1959, there was a slight increase to £1,450,000 and, in 1960, there was a further cut to £1,350,000. That was a time when people were crying out for telephones.

I said I would give credit where credit is due. Definitely, in the past few years the Minister has been doing his best to improve the telephone service and to make up for the harm that was done by his predecessor. It was a pity the Minister did not give the facts in the Dáil or should try to mislead the people. He was only covering up for his predecessor's deplorable performance in reducing the expenditure on telephone services in 1958 and 1959, when there was such a demand for the extra services. Now, of course, many people cannot understand the long delays when they apply for the installation of telephones, especially when they are looking for something that they are prepared to pay for, which provides employment for our own people.

Over the past few years we have spent millions on doubtful projects such as the Verolme Dockyard in Cork or the mines in Wicklow. I believe that it would have been much better at that time if those millions were spent in providing better telephone services. During the past seven years, from 1956 to 1962, 215,000 of our people emigrated. At least 100,000 of those were able young men. If the money had been provided by the Government at that time they could have been engaged at home in building for our country and in providing those services for which there was such a crying need. The provision of capital under the Telephone Capital Acts and other sources was reasonably adequate to meet the demand, and the anticipated demand, during the 1950s. If it were adequate at that time, why did the Government not increase the amount they were spending in 1958 and 1959 instead of reducing it, as I have pointed out, and then try to throw the blame on somebody else?

In the past year or so the programme seems to have collapsed and, therefore, we are glad to see that the Minister is now about to tackle the problem. There is no denying that last summer we had chaos because the Party who were supposed to be the greatest planners failed to plan and provide this essential service for our people. There is no denying that if plans were to make us prosperous and our country well off we would be the most prosperous people and the best off in the world. But, the whole fault is due to the fact that those who were supposed to be the greatest planners in the country fell down on the job in 1958, 1959 and 1960 and did not make the plans for the future they should have made at that time. If the plans were made in those years and the money spent we would not have the backlog we now have. We would not have had our telephone services going haywire last summer and autumn and we would not have had the chaos experienced in the services over the last years.

I also want to record my strongest objection for what is known as the double charge priority. If a person makes a telephone call and is told there is a one-hour delay, a two-hour delay or a three-hour delay, and if he states he is prepared to pay double charge, he gets the number at once. This system is entirely wrong and it should not be in existence. I believe anybody who has a telephone, and pays the charge for it, is entitled to the same priority as a person who has money enough to pay the double charge. I believe it is a bad practice. I would not object to a list of priorities being drawn up but I object to that practice.

I spoke about the chaos which existed for the past year. I consider it is a scandal, especially here in this city at the present time, and for the past year or so, that you could ring 10 at any time of the day, but particularly at night, and get no reply of any kind. You could hold the telephone for 5, 10, 15 or 20 minutes at times without getting an answer. That is completely wrong. We should have a system where the telephone operator could take up the phone and say: "Sorry, there will be a 10, 15 or 20 minutes' delay" or you could even be told that there would be a half hour's delay. There is nothing so annoying, or frustrating as having to stand in a telephone kiosk without getting information of any description. If you were told you had 10, 15, 20 minutes' or even a half hour's delay you could plan accordingly. I should like to know from the Minister if there is a shortage of staff. Can that be remedied? Are there not sufficient staff on at the peak hours? There should be sufficient staff on at the peak hours especially with a service that is paying adequately and which the people of the country are entitled to and prepared to pay for. There should not be those long delays.

The Minister, also, in the course of his speech, stated: "We have also decided in principle to introduce a scholarship scheme which will enable young men to attend full-time day courses in order to acquire professional engineering qualifications." I compliment the Minister on that. It is a very good idea. I think the various vocational education committees throughout the country are doing very good work and they will be prepared to help and co-operate with the Minister in any way they possibly can in that scheme.

We hope never again to have a repetion of the chaos we had last summer and autumn and we hope, with the £30 million that the Minister is now able to give, that we will have more efficient services in the future and that the people will get more attention than they have got over the past year.

Mr. Fitzgerald

On behalf of the Labour Party I should like to welcome this Bill and congratulate the Minister on introducing it. Now, when a figure of £30 million was mentioned, people raised their eyebrows and thought that this was a fantastic figure, but I think that those dealing with the problem will agree that the telephone system has been a fantastic problem. It is only by dealing with it in this courageous way that we can eliminate a lot of the problems and a lot of the delays that we have heard so much about.

Reference was made in the Dáil— the matter was alluded to here again today by Senator L'Estrange—to the delays and the frustration people experienced, especially during the past 12 months. The Minister on many occasions gave a reasonable explanation for the delays and confusion that were occurring. In the recent past the telephones have paid. That is a remarkable feature of the matter. I believe that, as a result of the expenditure of this £30 million over a five-year period, people can use telephones more frequently, and in consequence it is obvious that this should yield a dividend for the expenditure of the £30 million.

There are a few matters to which I would like to draw the attention of the Minister. One of them is the charge to subscribers for telephones. Perhaps I am treading on thin ice now, but I feel that on an occasion like this we have an opportunity of mentioning what is a grievance of many subscribers. If you live within three miles of an exchange and have a residence telephone you pay £2 5s. 0d. for a quarter, but if you happen to live 3 miles and seven furlongs from an exchange that extra 7 furlongs costs you 8/- per furlong. In my own area I happened to be on Maynooth exchange. Now there is no Maynooth exchange. There is no exchange in Lucan. It is all taken over and it is now Celbridge. There are people living just outside the 3-mile perimeter who have to pay this extra 8/- for every furlong. If you live over 3 miles and less than 4 miles you pay £5 1s. 0d. a quarter. I hope that, as a result of the profits which will come into the telephone account as a result of the expenditure of this £30 million, this problem will be looked at. I do not intend to delay the House except to say that we welcome the Bill. We think it is a courageous thing to do and we hope that as a result we will have a very much better telephone service.

Mr. Mooney

I should like to welcome the Bill also. I hope that if it does nothing else it will eliminate delays in telephone calls because since the minimum local charge is 3d. it is now cheaper to do your business by telephone than by writing. We in our county were in the same exasperating position as some of the other speakers were last summer. It was explained to us on making complaints that because of the fact that it was the tourist season a number of people in the country were telephoning out and so there was a glut of calls and delay.

I can give an example of very efficient and quick service as against all the delays referred to. Recently in my area a person who put a call through to America was speaking to the person at the other end within four minutes of the time at which the call was booked. That is a tribute to the Post Office. Let us give credit where credit is due.

Some of the problems under the automatic system that we have found —and this is a matter over which the Minister has no control since it is a technical matter—is that often when you dial you get the engaged signal and later you discover that the person to whom you were trying to make the call was not engaged. I found that occurs on a number of occasions myself. It is a matter that should receive the attention of the technical experts of the Department.

One thing which I could never understand in relation to the telephone service was that in my area we are living six miles away from an office but in order to get a call through to that place you would be there quicker by car, because I have to go to the local exchange, then go back to a place called Dowra and then back to the neighbouring parish four or five miles from Dowra which is only six miles from myself, so that I cover about 20 or 30 miles before getting to my destination. I feel that the service should be made available from the post office from which you are telephoning. If you want another district you should be able to phone it immediately without going through the major exchange.

I have nothing else to say but to welcome the Bill and to hope that it will eliminate the delays which we know the Post Office has very little control over that occurred last summer. I hope that there will be no repetition of these delays. At the same time, we have also had efficient and quick service not alone across Channel but to America.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I should like to join in the welcome to the Bill and to say that the Minister can always be assured that money will be made available to him or to any successor for a desirable project such as the servicing of the telephone system. He is all the more assured of that when he tells us, as we know, that the telephone service is one State service which pays its way. I think I am correct in saying that it is the only branch of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs which shows a profitable return. This is a very desirable state of affairs and I hope it will long continue.

Like Senator L'Estrange, I feel it is regrettable that the Minister on the Second Stage in the Dáil introduced a controversial note when he alleged that any shortcomings in the telephone service at the present time were due to lack of capital during the 50's and by the implication during the two terms of the inter-party Government. I am glad to see that he has not persisted as far as I can see in that unfounded allegation in this House. At least taking his speech at its face value, he has left out the objectionable words in his Dáil manuscript. I hope that he is not going to persist in it in his reply, because the facts do not warrant the charge.

It is abundantly clear that adequate funds were made available for the telephone service during the term of the inter-Party Government. In 1946 there was only £100,000 provided. In 1947-48 approximately £350,000 was provided. Over £1 million was provided for the first time in 1949 when the amount was £1,225,000. In 1950 the figure was £1,250,000. In 1956 and 1957 the sums of £1,750,000 and £1,650,000 respectively were provided. The following year, the year the Fianna Fáil Party returned to power, there was a drop of £500,000 and only £1,150,000 was provided. In 1959 there was a further drop of £100,000 and there was only £1,450,000 provided. There was a further drop of £100,000 in 1960.

Mr. Hilliard

The Senator is not taking into account withdrawals from stores.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I am taking the figures from official publications.

Mr. Hilliard

There is withdrawal from stores included in that.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and that applies to the years we were in office too. I am repeating that to keep the record right. The Minister is more accurate today when he says that the position may be due to shortage of capital in the past—indeed, in the early 60s when his Party were in office. At any rate, he is now asking for more money and he is welcome to it and I hope he will make the best of use of it. He is more courageous than his predecessor.

There is no doubt about it that the demand for telephones has grown here, and all over the world, in recent years. There were chaotic conditions in trunk calls last year in the city of Dublin and elsewhere. I think the worst delay one experiences in the city of Dublin is, strangely to say, from the automatic exchanges in Leinster House. If one tries to get a cheap call to the country at 8 or 9 o'clock at night one encounters unreasonable and unnecessary delays when one dials 0. I have had experience of that.

There is one other point I should like to raise. I understand property has been bought in the town of Cavan for the provision of a new automatic exchange in that town. Reading the Minister's more detailed speech—even if it were a little more objectionable it was more detailed in the Dáil and he gave a list of exchanges which we might expect in the near future—I notice that Cavan is not on the list, and I would be glad to know from the Minister when he may expect the Post Office and the automatic exchange building to get under way in the town of Cavan so that we may enjoy the benefit of an automatic telephone service. I am not saying that services provided in Cavan are any worse than in any other place, but I think that in a town of its size we should have an automatic exchange. The Minister has had at his disposal for over 12 months a very fine site right in the middle of the main street, provided by the local authority at a reasonable price, and I think it is fair to expect that that building should begin as soon as possible. I should like the Minister to deal specifically with that in his reply.

One other point raised in the Dáil interested me because I had experience of the same difficulty myself. If one goes into a very small sub-post office in the country he is expected to use the telephone across the counter, to the embarrassment of the person who is making the call and, indeed, to the embarrassment of the subpostmaster or subpostmistress. I think that was raised in the Dáil by a Deputy and a far as I can see the Minister did not deal with it in his reply. I know of a case myself where I sometimes go into a small post office. Usually, I am not embarrassed because I am telephoning only about something I forgot, but the subpostmistress and her staff are extremely embarrassed. They must either stand there listening to me or do something, which is most undesirable, and leave the room altogether. If I happen to be a hold-up man instead of a bona fide customer I might run off with whatever few shillings were in the post office. It would not take a lot of money to put that right. I do not know how many post offices are in the country where one is expected to use the office in such conditions.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

I will be very brief in my remarks on this Telephone Capital Bill because I believe it is a measure that does not lend itself to a long debate. What it principally proposes to do is to seek additional capital for further and better development of the telephone system in this country. That, indeed, is a very laudable undertaking and one, I think, on which the Minister deserves congratulation and credit. Because of that I would join with previous speakers in giving a hearty welcome to this Bill. It is a pity that in a debate like this comparisons are drawn, comparisons that might be unreal because there are so many factors in this problem and so many things to be taken into account that it is very difficult to draw comparisons. As I say, comparisons are odious.

I cannot say for the life of me why some of the people opposite, and also some of the people in the Dáil, took exception to the Minister's reference to the 50's. I saw nothing wrong with that I must confess. He made a general reference to what was or was not done in the 50's.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

It simply was not true.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

He properly pointed out that enough capital was not made available in the 50's for the development of the telephone services in this country. He did not refer to any government.

Mr. L'Estrange

By implication.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

As I have already said in my interjection, you people are sensitive about what happened in the 50's.

Mr. L'Estrange

Not a bit.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

It is as well to forget what happened in the past and look to the future. The proposal now is to spend a lot more money on the expansion of the telephone services in this country—£30 million. As somebody said, £30 million appears to be a hefty sum but, in my view and judging from what we have been told about the number of applications which have been made for the installation of telephones up and down the country, I am inclined to think that even the £30 million will hardly be sufficient over the next five years if the Minister is to meet all the demands that are being made on the service. I hope that it will, but even if it does not, if that sum proves to be inadequate, I am sure if the Minister comes along again for an additional sum his efforts will be welcomed by everybody here just as they have been welcomed today.

There is one fact that emerges from this whole discussion and from the debate. There is a much greater demand for telephones now than there ever has been before. That, to my mind, is a clear indication of the growing prosperity of the country. Unless there is prosperity in business circles, and in other circles as well, people will not look for telephones. People do not look for things which they think they cannot afford and it is because people in business, in social circles, and so on, think they can afford it, that they are making application for the installation of telephones in their homes and business premises.

Reference has been made to what is alleged to have been the chaotic telephone system in this country some time this year. I do not subscribe to that. It is true that calls have been held up much longer than people would like but that has been the case over a number of years. There cannot be perfection in every system but the Minister now is making a valiant attempt to perfect the system and, as has been said, he cannot do that without the necessary capital.

Senator L'Estrange referred to what he called a priority charge and it seems he is not in favour of it

Mr. L'Estrange

A double charge.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

It is the same thing: I shall call it a priority charge. I do not see anything fundamentally wrong with that. I imagine that a business person who would be concerned about the progress and advancement of his business would not object to paying extra for a call. His business would be such as would justify it in comparison with other people who might have to make calls on the same telephone.

Mr. L'Estrange

I would agree with the list of priorities but only if he has the money to pay it.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

In fact, it works out as a priority charge.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

Is it not really a black market in the telephone system?

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

If that were the case, we could also say that the differentiation between the charge for business people and professional people and ordinary people is a black market charge. Such a differentiation exists between the charge that business and professional people have to bear and ordinary householders.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

Not on the calls; it is on the rental.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

Would the rental be described as a black market charge? All these things have to be attended to. I want to refer to the acquisition of sites for telephone exchanges. I do not know what steps the officials of the Department take to acquire a site in a provincial town or if they consult the local authority and come to terms with them. The reason I refer to it is that within recent times a telephone exchange has been established in the town of New Ross and I happen to be a member of the local urban council. I am not aware that the officials of the Department ever came near us to discuss the pros and cons of the case. However, maybe some other system was adopted in that instance.

This is not a Bill on which we can have a very long discussion. It is purely a Money Bill. The Minister is seeking a lot of capital now for the extension of the telephone service and we wish him good luck and God speed in his efforts to improve the telephone system in this country.

Mr. Costelloe

I welcome this Bill and I believe the money sought will be money well spent. There is a great demand for telephone service at the moment all over the country. Where the telephone service was quite adequate up to recently, a lot of people are now applying for telephones but cannot get them.

In North Kerry, I was asked to do my best in this matter. It is a tourist area. Very often tourists, especially business people, find it very difficult to get in touch with their homes or their businesses by way of trunk calls and sometimes they have to wait for hours. That was not the position some years ago. Things are different now. Ballybunion especially is meeting with a lot of difficulty in that regard. I recommend the Minister to take a note of that.

I believe the chief cause the telephone service is inadequate is that there is extra money in the country and business is improving everywhere. I wish the Minister every success in his undertaking in this regard.

Professor O'Brien

It is very seldom that one can welcome a large amount of additional Government expenditure without any reservation whatsoever but this is one of the occasions on which we can do so. The large sum which the Minister is requesting to be provided will be invested in a truly productive investment in the sense that the assets created will pay their own way and will not leave any dead-weight debt to be met by additional taxation. It is unlike the position with so much capital expenditure that, even though it may be productive in the very long run, it saddles the taxpayer during the short period with additional taxation to pay the interest on the debt.

The investment proposed now is self-liquidating. Therefore, merely from the narrow financial point of view, it is one with which we can all agree without any strain on our conscience. The telephone in modern times is a necessary help to the development of business. We live in a highly competitive period. We are entering on the Second Programme for Economic Expansion in which we shall find ourselves competing more and more with the outside world. Everything that adds to what is now called the infra-structure of efficiency in society can help us in that struggle. All forms of communication—post, telegraph or telephone—are a help in that direction.

The most up-to-date means of communication are necessary in modern times. The Minister proposes to use this money in order to increase the number of telephones in the country and to increase the efficiency of the whole telephone service. Therefore, from the point of view of our productive efficiency, of our capacity to compete in this very difficult period which lies ahead in the second period, this is truly productive expenditure which everybody can welcome.

But there is the other side to it. As Senator Costelloe said, telephones are not only useful on the productive side but they are a sign of prosperity, a sign that people are seeking a new social amenity, a sign of a rise in the standard of living. It is one of the signs of what has now come to be known as the affluent society. If a country becomes better off more of the national income is spent on durable consumer goods of one sort or another and among those durable consumer goods the telephone ranks very high.

Expenditure out of the money raised under the Bill will have both a productive and a consumption justification. It can be justified from every point of view and, therefore, the Seanad should welcome the proposals with enthusiasm.

There is one small technical matter to which the Minister referred: the shortage of engineers. I wonder why there should be a shortage of engineers in view of the fact that so many engineering graduates of Irish universities have to emigrate to look for employment. I hope that the Minister will keep in the closest contact with the engineering schools of the universities so as to ensure that graduates produced there will be able to find productive employment at home.

I was very glad to hear that he proposes to allow some employees to attend full-time day courses in universities. It is being done in other Departments and it is, I believe, yielding a rich dividend. It is certainly a step in the right direction. I hope that the Minister will employ as many existing graduates as he can and find as many young people as he can to release for day courses. This would increase efficiency, would be a step towards giving employment to young graduates and would further the aims of the measure which we all welcome.

Mr. O'Reilly

It is good to hear Senator O'Brien in favour of a measure of this sort which entails extra capital expenditure. It is good, furthermore, to hear him say that he regards it as genuine capital investment. I thought that at best he would regard it as non-recurring investment or take the view that in the long run it might liquidate itself. I am glad to hear him express the view that it is capital investment which because of the profits accruing would ultimately liquidate itself. It is good that he should take that view and it is hopeful, but I wonder if that is not a bit over-hopeful on his part so as to create an atmosphere to encourage the recruitment of people who he seems to think should give service because of this expenditure, people from the universities. Being from a rural area I am inclined to make that little criticism, but I agree with Senator O'Brien that this expenditure can be regarded as genuine capital expenditure.

It might be argued by some people that it could be regarded as a social investment that might not necessarily liquidate itself but even if it did not that the investment was justified because it provided a better service for the people. If it can be regarded as creating to some degree a service for the people then that service should as far as possible be evenly distributed. The people of the rural areas would be entitled to a fair share of the service created, entitled to an even break.

It may be easy to make a case for automatic exchanges in Carrick-on-Shannon or in Cavan. They are very desirable things I agree because without those facilities, that equipment, that mechanism, you cannot have a good service. Telephone lines, speakers or call offices without that organisation in the backroom would be of very little value because people would be so annoyed by the delays that they would feel the telephone was more a nuisance than a help.

One of the criticisms at the moment and in the recent past by people who use telephones is that they cannot get the on-the-spot service that they think they should get. We all appreciate when the annoyance passes over that delays are due to additional traffic. When too many people want to use a circuit at the one time somebody must get annoyed and the people who get most annoyed are probably the unfortunate people who must operate the system. It is not the sort of employment I would like to take. I would lose my temper very quickly, I am afraid. I am inclined to do that anyway.

There is one matter that deserves the Minister's attention. There are areas in the country where three post office dioceses or districts seem to meet—one word is just as good as another. Where, say, the circuits of Cavan, Carrick-on-Shannon and Longford happen to meet you are bound to have a rather forgotten area where people have to travel rather a long distance to get to a phone and when they do get to the phone of their choice they are over-priced. That always happens in rural areas. I have had complaints from many people about this.

A person living on the perimeter of the area served by Cavan may want to ring Longford. Even though he may be in County Longford his post office routes take him to Cavan, Mullingar and ultimately to Longford, a distance of perhaps 15 miles and the cost is much greater. A person in North Longford ringing Oldcastle or Clones would get the same call for three pennies. There are several such areas in the country. They are not confined to one particular place. Where post office districts meet you seem to find a no man's land. The Minister may not agree that there is a no man's land but by comparison with the service which exists in other areas—and all things are comparative—I think I could truthfully say that there is something resembling a no man's land and that lines are not being developed to give good coverage or good service to the people of the perimeter areas where districts meet.

I am hoping, by bringing this matter to the notice of the Minister, that he will have it examined. When this House agrees to the provision of extra capital investment in the telephone service, that investment should be fairly spread and a fair share of that capital should be spent in the development of the service in the areas I have mentioned where people at the moment seem to suffer hardship.

Mr. Brady

I welcome this Bill and I should like to congratulate the Minister on the improvement that has taken place in the telephone service in the area where I live in the past twelve months. Long ago great delay was experienced in making trunk calls. On one occasion I had to wait one and a half hours when making a call to Ennis, which is a distance of only twenty miles by road from where I live, but all calls had to go through Limerick. On two occasions I had to wait one and a half hours to make a call to the courthouse there. There is a new line from Limerick to Scariff and the waiting time is only three minutes. I want to thank the Minister and his Department for that.

There is a great demand for telephones. People have asked me to get them telephones. As Senator Ó Ciosáin and other Senators have said, the priest, the veterinary surgeon, the doctor, the farmer all require telephones. The demand for telephones is due to progress. Long ago, milk went by horse and cart to the creamery. Now it is taken by motor vehicle. The demand for private telephones is due to the fact that people are better off and are anxious to move with the times and avail of modern amenities.

I should like to thank the Minister for the extra accommodation provided in Scariff and Tuamgraney which facilitates calls to Ennis. For calls that one had formerly to wait 1½ hours the waiting time is now only three minutes.

Mr. Hilliard

This Bill can be taken in sequence to the 1960 Act. That Act authorised the Minister for Finance to make available £10 million over a specified period of time and, as I have already told the Seanad, that money has been used over a shorter period of time than anticipated. There is something more in the development of a telephone service than the mere injection of capital. You must have a staff and we have been building up our staff since 1960 to meet the growing demands of the service. Since 1960, we have increased the working staff by 50 per cent and we are using the capital at a certain rate, one year so much more than another—£4½ million this year and £6 million next year—and we will increase the staff to usefully employ the amount of capital that will be made available next year.

I am thankful to the Seanad for the manner in which it has met this Bill. When dealing with the Bill the Senators have been co-operative in their approach to this matter. They realise, of course, as well as I realise, that the deficiencies in the telephone system that became so very apparent during last summer, were due mainly to the very increased call demand that was made on the service.

A telephone service is efficient insofar as its network and equipment are capable of meeting the calls that the public put upon it at any given time or over a period of time. Whenever the calls put upon a telephone service exceed the capabilities of the equipment to carry the calls, you are in trouble. The same thing applies to an automatic exchange. If the outlets from an automatic exchange are not sufficient to carry the additional traffic on the automatic exchange that the exchange is capable of taking you get all classes of queer results—extra-ordinary results—and there is nothing that the engineers in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs can do about a matter such as that except to provide the additional circuits that are needed to meet the demand and the anticipated demand.

Much has been said here in connection with this question of capital allocations and my reference to capital restrictions as a cause of the present defects in the telephone service has been challenged here and it was challenged in the Dáil also. It has been asserted that I sought to blame my predecessors for the present defects. Nothing could be further from my purpose. My aim is to put the service right and that is why this huge sum is being sought. But, there can be no denying the facts and the facts are that the telephone service was not given enough capital during the 1950's to provide enough capital for future growth and it was this failure to provide enough capital for future growth that has led to the present defects, such as they are. You have to take that along with the unprecedented demand that has occurred for telephone services, both call traffic and for telephones, since the commencement of 1960.

It has been asserted that the provisions then made were sufficient to meet the demand then existing or anticipated. At least, that is what I understand from the statements made here by the Senators who raised this matter. That is, in fact, incorrect.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

We were saying that the inter-Party Government provided more in the 1950's than the Minister's Government.

Mr. Hilliard

The money was provided in the 1950's. There was £8 million provided in 1951. That is what the Telephone Capital Act authorised the Minister for Finance to advance to the Post Office—£8 million in 1951. That Act was brought in by the then Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, Mr. Childers, the present Minister for Transport and Power. The 1956 Act— I did not intend to go into this— provided for the authorisation of £6 million. That is a drop of £2 million.

Mr. L'Estrange

For how many years?

Mr. Hilliard

For four years. I am saying that. That is, £14 million of capital was made available. The Minister for Finance was authorised to invest £14 million of capital in the telephone service in the 1950's. I am asking in the 1960's for the investment of £40 million and, certainly, the investment of £40 million in the 1960's and its proper utilisation by an increased staff will have a profound effect on the telephone service in the 1970's. There is no denying that fact.

I am in very good company in saying that there was a shortage of capital in the 1950's. The then Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, when he was introducing the 1956 Telephone Capital Bill, which by the way, provided for £6 million, as I say—made it quite clear that that sum would not be sufficient to meet completely, on the basis of recent demand—that was the demand then—the anticipated needs of the service over the next few years. He went on to say that in consequence they would not be able to install all the subscribers' lines they wished, to undertake all the underground development schemes required in built-up areas, to meet, and to anticipate, applications for telephones, to equip as many exchanges for automatic working as they would wish, nor to provide all the additional trunk lines they would do if there was no capital shortage.

Mr. L'Estrange

But your predecessor cut it by a further £500,000 in the next three years.

Mr. Hilliard

In referring to this I want to make it clear I am not blaming any of my predecessors.

Senators

Hear, hear.

Tomás Ó Maoláin

The Senator is caught out in that.

Mr. L'Estrange

He certainly is not

Mr. Fitzpatrick

The Minister was caught out in the Dáil and he modified his statement.

Mr. Hilliard

I have no doubt they did the best they could with the money that could be got. All I wish to say is that there was not enough money available and no bandying about of figures will prove otherwise. If any further proof is necessary, I think the fact that we are now looking for £30 million for the next five years, which is almost as much as has been spent in the past 40 years, ought to be sufficiently indicative of the massive investment necessary to bring the telephone service up to a statisfactory standard. I think that is about the last we will hear about that in my view because this Bill gives the Minister for Finance authority to make advances to the Post Office and the necessary capital for the purposes indicated in the Bill. We hope to utilise the £30 million over the next five years at the rate of £6 million per year but that is dependent upon the capital formation being such that the State can afford to invest the capital and have the capital to invest in the national development programme. That has already been outlined in the general sense. The Bill does not provide the capital. The capital formation obtains in this country on a sound fiscal policy followed by the Government in office.

Mr. L'Estrange

There was £1 million more spent in 1955, 1956 and 1957 than in 1959 and 1960.

Mr. Hilliard

What is the Senator talking about? There was £14 million made available, and utilised, in the 1950's—£14 million was not sufficient to meet the increased demand of the telephone services in the 1960's.

Mr. L'Estrange

The whole blame lies with your predecessor who spent £1 million less in 1959 and 1960 than was spent in 1956 and 1957—£4.8 million against £3.9 million.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Order.

Mr. Hilliard

In 1956 there was a withdrawal of £350,000 from stores. You have to deduct that from the figure the Senator gave and you also have to take into consideration that up to 80 men belonging to the Engineering Branch of the Post Office had their services dispensed with during 1956 because the Post Office was not in a position to employ the full staff they had in the development of the telephone services.

Mr. L'Estrange

And still there are over 50,000 fewer people employed today than there were in 1950. Account for that.

Mr. Hilliard

I have already indicated to Senator L'Estrange that to get a full picture of the capital investment and the work done by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in the provision of an efficient telephone service you have to take something else into consideration besides the necessary capital investment. You have got to take into consideration the stores on hands, the stores on order and the strength of the technical or labour force. When you have the full picture then you can compare what happened in any particular year. Up to 80 men were let go from the Engineering Branch in 1956 because the Post Office was not able to employ them.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

Can the Minister indicate why £500,000 less was allocated in 1958 than in 1960?

Mr. Hilliard

I would want notice of that question. I will give you the withdrawal from stores. I am not going to follow every hare. There was £14 million provided in the 1950's and I am asking the State to invest £30 million. We are confident that the State will be able to provide that over the 1960's if we have a good Government.

There has been a good deal of complaint about the speed of answering by exchanges, particularly Dublin Exchange, during the peak traffic period last summer. As I explained in reply to such criticisms in the course of the Dáil debate on this Bill last week, I am aware that the speed of answer was poor on occasions. The fault lay, not with the operating staff, but with inadequate equipment which was unable to cope with surges of traffic, as a result of which heavy additional burdens were thrown on the operators in making connections and in assisting on calls that would ordinarily be dialled direct by subscribers.

I wish to make it clear, however, that the speed of answer at almost all hours of the day has for a considerable time past been generally satisfactory. No effort will be spared to improve matters further and to maintain a good standard at all times. Senators will appreciate, however, that on special occasions some deterioration is inevitable. Unexpected surges of traffic occur, for which I cannot expect my Department to make advance staffing provision. In addition, there are very special occasions on which it would be unreasonable to expect normal service. For example, I am making a special appeal to the public to limit their telephoning on Christmas Day to emergency calls or calls which do not require operator service. This is necessary in order to allow as many as possible of the operating staff to spend Christmas Day at home.

In regard to the special charge for trunk calls to which Senator L'Estrange referred, the aim is to ensure that, when a particular trunk route is congested, urgent and important calls on it will be given precedence over ordinary calls. The only practicable way of confirming that a particular call is genuinely urgent and important is to apply the special rate, which is double the normal fee. My Department is not interested in the special rate from the revenue aspect and would gladly drop it in favour of any other suitable and effective means of affording priority on a fair basis. Approximately one trunk call in every one thousand is made at the special rate.

Senator Fitzpatrick referred to the lack of privacy in telephoning from sub-post offices. In most cases a silence cabinet is available and, generally, it may be taken that in cases where there is no cabinet the reason is lack of space in the sub-post office. I do not know if Senator Fitzpatrick has any particular office in mind. I would not know what he would know, by looking at the office, whether it could carry a silence cabinet or not, but we like to put them in wherever we can even though it means further capital cost.

Senator Fitzgerald referred to extra mileage charge made to subscribers more than three miles from the exchange. In regard to this I wish to say that the cost of installing and maintaining the long lines in question is generally very high and even with the extra charge the revenue from those lines is rarely enough to meet the annual cost. Sometimes we do not get interest on the amount of capital involved but if the telephone network expands we will have to have more exchanges and it will narrow down the area serviced from a particular exchange. It may be that in time a problem such as that can, and will be, met, but I would not wish to say anything definite on it.

Senator O'Brien asked me if the universities were approached in relation to the engineers. The technical officers of my Department visit the final year classes in the university to inform students of electrical engineering and physics of the employment offered in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. It is true that a number of them emigrate and do not come to us. We would be anxious to get them. Insofar as the Department and myself are concerned we would be glad to see many more of them come to the post office when this money is available and the organisation is being perfected to carry out this immense task and this work which is waiting to be done. There will be opportunities for electrical engineers in the post office.

Senator Fitzpatrick asked me about the exchange in Cavan. There is an automatic exchange and a new post office proposed for Cavan on that site. The position is that we are only in the preliminary planning stage in the post office building branch and in my view it will be a long time before the buildings are erected. The Office of Public Works comes into this.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I do not want to mention this again. May I be pardoned for mentioning it now? If this is the case would the Minister and his Department take steps to see that this large site in the central markets in Cavan is tidied up and kept tidy so as not to disfigure the town for some years to come? It is under the control of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs now and has been somewhat neglected. I had occasion to write to the Department about it. If it is neglected in disuse it will be very unsightly.

Mr. Hilliard

I will have to look at that. It is something that should not be allowed to happen. A site of that nature should be kept as well as possible in present circumstances. Senator Ó Ciosáin referred to the selection of sites and asked if local authorities are consulted. I cannot say that if that is what happened at New Ross, but it is the ordinary practice to consult the local authorities and the other interested parties in a matter of this kind. The Office of Public Works comes into the selection of sites also, and I am unable to say what happened in New Ross, but from my own experience apart from ministerial experience I know that in some cases people call to the county engineer or the local engineer attached to the local authority and, having done that, they have discharged their function. If the members of the council do not know about it then I suppose it is a matter for the office routine in the council concerned.

I think that I have answered all the points raised by Senators, and I want to say again that I am grateful for the manner in which the Bill has been received. I hope that when it becomes law the telephone system will improve out of all recognition over the next four or five years. I am unable to say what will happen next summer in relation to telephone traffic. If it is a good summer and we have a very large influx of tourists it may be that the telephone service next summer will be taxed to its capacity, but, nevertheless, the orders that were placed in 1960 for equipment are coming to hand now only over the last year, and the necessary equipment that has come is being installed at the fastest possible rate. I hope that by next summer the telephone service will be able to carry the traffic offering, but I would not wish to forecast in advance what the position will be next summer. I hope that it will not be like last summer when I admit it was taxed beyond capacity. It is not fair to say that our telephone service is chaotic or obsolete. The fact is that the telephone branch, the operators in it and the automatic exchanges handled successfully last year 167,000,000 calls—a tremendous advance in the number of calls in any year during the fifties.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.

Bill reported without recommendation, received for final consideration and ordered to be returned to the Dáil.