Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 15 May 1929

Vol. 29 No. 16

In Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 62—Posts and Telegraphs.

Minister for Finance (Mr. Blythe)

I move:—

"Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £1,483,435 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1930, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisi Oifig an Aire Puist agus Telegrafa agus Seirbhisi áirithe eile atá fé riara na hOifige sin, maraon le Telefóna.

That a sum not exceeding £1,483,435 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1930, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and of certain other Services administered by that Office, including Telephones.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Heffernan)

Before entering into a detailed statement on the finances of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, I would like to appeal in the first instance to Deputies to approach this particular Vote in a somewhat different spirit from that in which Votes are usually approached here, for this reason— that the particular Department in question is to be regarded as more in the nature of a business proposition than any other Department which is discussed in this House. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs renders a definite service to the public in this country in return for payment for that service. It is not altogether self-supporting, but we endeavour to bring it as near being self-supporting as we can, taking account of the circumstances which control it including the fact that it is subject to the democratic control of the Parliament of this country. The general acceptance of the work of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs centres round the idea that it deals mainly with postal activities. Perhaps it might be well to remind Deputies before proceeding to further examination that the work carried on by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs has become very complex. I want to mention, in short, some—not all—of the activities of that Department. In addition to the ordinary activities connected with the postal services the Department of Posts and Telegraphs is responsible for—telegraphs, telephones, money orders (home and foreign), postal orders, savings bank, payment of old age pensions, military pensions, savings certificates. It collects dog licences and sells stamps for national health and unemployment insurance also.

As a preface to my statement, having outlined the general activities of the Department. I will now deal with the finances of the Department. The estimated expenditure of the Department for 1929-30, as shown in the Estimates, is £2,233 435. The estimated expenditure for the past year, 1928-29, was £2,425,555. These figures show a decrease in estimated expenditure for the coming financial year of £192,120. It will be remembered, however, that after the issue of the Book of Estimates a saving of £40,000, which it was anticipated would be made in rural postal services, was abandoned, and from the decrease in estimated expenditure this £40,000 must be taken, showing an estimated reduction in expenditure as compared with last year of £152,120. The revenue for this financial year is estimated at £1,771,000. Taking that from the estimated expenditure already mentioned, £2,233,435, we get a nominal deficit of £462,435. To this must be added again the £40,000 estimated saving already mentioned, showing an actual nominal deficit of £502,435 as compared with a deficit of £669,995 last year and with a deficit of £730,935 for 1927-28. I want to point out that the deficit shown in these figures is really only nominal, because the appropriation accounts and the finance accounts are really only cash accounts; they only purport to show the actual cash payments to be made and the actual receipts in cash. Before I go on to deal with the real deficit shown in the commercial accounts, which are the more complete accounts of this department, I might account for the various decreases and, in some cases, increases which have taken place in the Estimates as compared with last year. I will only deal with the larger amounts. I am not going to enter into any great detail, as the full figures are available, and can be shown to any Deputy at any time he asks for them. The decreases and increases do not take into account the bonus figures, and therefore, will not agree with the amounts shown in the Vote; they will in most cases be less.

There is a decrease in expenditure of £2,252 under the head of metropolitan offices. That is due to retrenchment in telegraph staff, which is offset, to a certain extent, by the incremental increases in salaries. There is a decrease of £2,435 under Sub-head D—Purchase of Sites. There is a decrease of £29,000 under Sub-head E. (1). conveyance of mail by rail; that is due to a revision of the subsidies formerly paid to the railway company for the conveyance of letter mails. There is a decrease of £4,000 under Sub-head E.— Packet Services. That is due to a re-assessment of subsidies in connection with the conveyance of mails between Ireland and England. There is a decrease of £3,250 under Sub-head G. (1)—General Stores. That is due to a smaller payment to Great Britain for the use of cross-Channel mail bags. There is an increase in the provision of mechanical transport. There is a decrease in regard to uniform and clothing of £2,510, and there is a decrease of £7 214 under the heading of salaries. In the Engineering Department there is a decrease under the heading of Engineering Materials (Sub-head K.) of £26 665, and there is a decrease of £13,360 under the heading of Contract Work. There is a decrease of £8,000 under the heading Annual Compensation Allowances under Article X of the Treaty. These are the figures dealing with the important decreases under the various items in this Vote.

In regard to the increases, there is an increase of £13,380 under the heading M. 2—Telephone Development (Annuities). This is due to provision for repayment of annuities which are cumulative according as borrowings from the Exchequer accrue. In regard to superannuation allowances, there is an increase of £21,000, under Sub-head N. 3— Additional Allowances under Article X.

An analysis of the foregoing statements reveals that economies effected by general retrenchment of services, re-organisation, re-assessment of mail subsidies, and in the purchase of stores, amount to, approximately, £179,000.

Against this gross saving must, however, be put the increased expenditure consequent on telephone development, and the anticipated release of all applicants for retirement under Article X. of the Treaty and other miscellaneous items amounting to £13,000 and £30,000 respectively. Ignoring bonus, there is, therefore, a net reduction of £136,000. As I said previously, the appropriation accounts and the finance accounts do not, and are not intended, to represent the true financial position of the Post Office. They are simply cash statements. No account is taken of services rendered to other departments, or of adjustments in regard to depreciation, interest on capital, etc. The commercial accounts published periodically show the correct financial position. The deficit of £1,108,260 will, it is hoped, be reduced to round £200,000 at the end of 1929-30.

I intend to give here, for the benefit of Deputies, a statement showing the various deficits from year to year as shown by the commercial account from the year 1922-23 to the present year. In the year 1922-23 it was, as already stated, £1,108,260; in 1923-24, £773,749; in 1924-25, £471,974; in 1925-26, £413,967; in 1926-27, £379,756; in 1927-28, £262,774, and in 1928-29, £194,290.

Before passing from this particular item, I want to emphasise and to call the attention of the Dáil to the saving which has been made in the financial position of the Post Office since it was taken over by the Free State Government in 1922. A very considerable saving was effected, a saving of roughly speaking, £900,000, has been effected. The accounts of the Post Office Department might be regarded to a certain extent as approximating to the accounts of a business concern. If Deputies approach the matter from the point of view of the shareholders of a joint stock company examining the accounts of that company, it must be regarded as satisfactory that a deficit of that amount has, in a short period of seven years, been reduced by £900,000. When Deputies are criticising this, as undoubtedly they will criticise this Vote, I ask that they be reasonable enough to give credit where credit is due, and to acknowledge that the thanks of the Dáil are due to the officials of the Department on whose behalf I speak, for the wonderful work that has been done in reducing the loss, for which the State is responsible with regard to this Department.

As everybody knows, the activities of the Post Office largely consist and include three main services—the postal service, the telegraph service, and the telephones. The postal service being the original service and the service from which the work of the whole Post Office has sprung, is still by far the most important. I will deal with that side of the service first. In 1923 the loss on this service was £656,200 and that was reduced in 1927-28 to £71,307. It is estimated that the loss will be reduced to £27,000 in 1928-29. It has been the custom in the past when dealing with the Post Office Vote in this House to give at this stage an analysis of the losses and gains in the postal service. That is to say, the various items in the postal service are segregated. Letters, newspapers, parcels, money orders, etc., which come under the heading of postal service are segregated. Then there are registered letters. The sections of the service which are paying are shown with the amount which accrues to them as against the losses on the other sections.

This year I do not propose to give those figures, because those particular figures are the subject of examination at the moment by a departmental committee, and we are not perfectly satisfied that the figures as generally shown are apportioned and segregated in a way which indicates clearly the loss or gains on the various sections of the postal service. It is also customary to give statistics dealing with the number of letters and other matters that were posted. I have available for the Deputies, if they care to see them, or if they now wish me to go through them, the statistics showing the number of letters, printed papers, postcards, parcels, newspapers, etc., posted and delivered in 1928-29 as compared with 1927-28. As these figures show comparatively slight changes I do think it is unnecessary to read them. They indicate in general a slight increase in the amount of matter that is dealt with by the Post Office.

There is, however, one set of figures which I intend to give and which I consider of special interest. The total of the various postal packets, etc., posted for the year 1928-29 was 176,200,000. The total of similar items delivered for the same period was 208,000,000. There is a certain deduction to be drawn from these figures, and that is this, that we deliver a considerably larger amount of postal matter than is actually posted in the country. Leaving out parcels, the Post Office delivered 31,000,000 more postal packets in this State than were actually posted. That in itself is responsible to a certain extent for portion of the loss which the Post Office here has to bear. We are responsible for the delivery of a considerable amount of postal matter for which we receive no payment. Deputies, however, will have an opportunity in that connection of giving their views. We are governed by international convention and, short of cutting our connection with the International Postal Union, we have to stand the loss which falls on us in that connection. That is because of our peculiar geographical situation.

It might be of interest to Deputies who may be thinking of the possibility of having the postal rates in this country changed to the rates in Great Britain to have these figures before them. It may be also of interest to them to know the losses that would accrue to the Postal Department if we were to change our rate to the rate prevailing in England. The cost of the reduction to the rates prevailing in England would be £241,000. That is, of course, a reduction in the postage in letters. The Saorstát rate for postcards, parcels and newspapers is the same as in Great Britain.

Under the heading of the postal service, I will deal with the various subsidiary items connected with that service. Motor mail services continue to be availed of. We have improved the mail service by the introduction of motor transport. There are now 91 motor car services in operation under transport, while departmentally the number of motor vehicles employed on mail service is 59. Owing to the difficulties in obtaining vans of a suitable type the establishment of additional motor services has had to be postponed, but it is hoped to start them without further delay.

Deputies may remember that in 1924 we introduced the cash on delivery system into the Postal Department. That system has developed to a fairly considerable extent, although it has seemed to have slowed up considerably during the last year or two. The figures under the head of cash on delivery items are as follow:—In 1924, 1,644 items were delivered with cash collection of £1,831 10s. 6d. In 1925-26, there were 4,673 items, with a cash value of £4,666 15s. 3d.; in 1926-27, the items were 10,413, with a cash value of £10,859; in 1927-28, the items were 13,112, with a cash value of £13,849. In 1928-29, the number of items were 14,918, with a cash value of £15,712.

It may be of interest to Deputies to know, as they will see under the appropriate sub-head, that a considerable saving is now being made in regard to the charge for the conveyance of letters. That is due to the fact that negotiations with the Great Southern Railway Company for a revised agreement for the conveyance of mails and letters was made last summer. Under the new contract, which will last over a term of ten years, the payments originally made to the railway company are reduced by £25,000. Negotiations are also completed with the Great Northern Railway Company and a reduction is effected. Negotiations are also going on with the Londonderry and Lough Swilly Railway Company.

At the moment the Universal Postal Convention is being held in London, and as this Department is represented there by its principal officials it may be of interest to indicate the work which is being done. I will outline the work of the Convention and indicate its effect on the postal services in this country. The Saorstát adhered to a Universal Postal Convention in September, 1923, and was admitted to the Universal Postal Union in July, 1924. The countries of the Union form one single postal territory for the reciprocal exchange of correspondence and freedom of transit for that correspondence, except parcels, is guaranteed throughout the territory of the Union. It is for this reason the Saorstát is obliged to deliver, without remuneration, a large amount of excess correspondence which comes into this country for delivery. It was thought this matter might be rectified at the London Congress, the question being about to be raised by the Australian Post Office. At a preliminary conference, however, it was unanimously recommended that no alteration be made on the grounds that it would cut across the fundamental principles of the Convention. It may be taken that the proposal is dead.

Mr. Davin

What is the basis of representation, and what is the number of delegates attending that Convention on behalf of the present Government?

Mr. Heffernan

There are three delegates attending on behalf of the Government. I am not sure if there is any definite basis of representation. All the Governments are invited to send delegates. Of course any arrangement, to be satisfactorily settled by the Postal Canvention, must be unanimous.

Mr. Davin

If the Parliamentary Secretary is so concerned about saving, surely one delegate instead of three would have been sufficient.

Mr. Heffernan

We can deal with that later.

Mr. Cassidy

Can the Parliamentary Secretary state if the representatives attending from the Saorstát are prepared to back the suggestion put forward by the Australian authorities regarding an adjustment on the matter of postal deliveries?

Mr. Heffernan

I have no doubt they are prepared to back any suggestions that will react in our favour, provided that there is a reasonable possibility of bringing them into effect. It seems unlikely, however, because any change in the present arrangement would be an alteration in the fundamental basis of the Convention, which is a free delivery inside a country of letters coming from any other country.

Mr. Moore

Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us whether there are any other countries in the same position as the Saorstát—that is, having a much larger reception of letters than the outgoing number?

Mr. Heffernan

I am not in a position to give particulars of that kind. Necessarily there must be countries where that happens, but I cannot mention any particular one. Probably because of the suggestion it has put forward, Australia is in that position. If the Deputy wants exact information on the point, I shall get it for him.

Leaving postal work on one side and turning to other work performed by the Post Office, the following figures may be of interest— Value of money orders issued in the year 1928-29, £5,289,634; money orders paid, £7,186,456; postal orders issued, £1,460,083; postal orders paid, £1,475,989. Dealing with the Savings Bank, the conduct of which is part of the work of the Post Office, it may be of interest to know that the value of deposits during last year was £1,212,324 and the value of Savings Bank withdrawals, £1,003,340, showing a balance of £208,984. There are some figures which I will give you dealing with Savings Bank deposits and withdrawals, and they may be of general interest. They show that in the year 1923 the number of deposits made in the Free State Savings Bank was 424,853, and that the average amount deposited was £4 18s. 2d. In the year 1928 the number of deposits was 502,255, and the average amount deposited was £2 8s. 3d. The obvious deduction is that the number of deposits had increased while the average deposit had decreased. The number of accounts remaining open at the end of 1923 was 80,400, and the number of accounts remaining open at the end of 1928 was 174,000. The average amount standing to the credit of each account in 1923 was £19 17s. 2d., while the average amount standing to the credit of each account in 1928 was £17 16s. 10d. That indicates an increase in the number of Savings Bank accounts, with a slight decrease in the amount standing to the credit of each account. The value of Savings Certificates issued for the Post Office Department during last year was £1,384,796. The value of the Savings Certificates repaid in the same period was £419,939.

I will now pass from the postal side to telephones. The estimated revenue for the telephone service during 1928-29 was £343,000, and the estimated expenditure, £378,000, showing a deficit of £35,000. Telephones definitely take second place amongst the activities of the Postal Department. They take precedence of the telegraphic service; they are gradually expanding and increasing while the telegraphic service is contracting.

In regard to the general work of the Telephone Department during the past year there were 73 new telephone exchanges opened, and provision is being made for further extensions during the current year, particularly in Counties Donegal and Mayo. There is, however, much scope for an increase in the number of subscribers at rural exchanges. Of those opened last year 62 have less than four subscribers each, and in the remainder of the cases the number varies from 4 to 11. Additional trunk circuits, representing about 240 miles of wire, were provided during the year.

Mr. Davin

Would the Parliamentary Secretary give the average cost of installing the 73 new exchanges?

Mr. Heffernan

I could not give the figure. It is easy to ask a question of that kind, but it could not be answered now. If the Deputy puts down a question I shall get the information for him. In regard to semi-automatic rural exchanges, I may mention that a new type of switchboard has been developed with a view to giving full night services to rural exchanges, and is at present undergoing trial at Tallaght. The main feature of the switchboard is that no operator is required at the rural exchange. When a subscriber rings he is connected automatically to the main exchange, which serves the rural exchange—Dublin in the case of Tallaght—and the main exchange deals with the call. If the lines between the exchanges are all engaged, the call is not lost, but is "stored," and reaches the main exchange operator as soon as a line becomes free. The results of the test have, on the whole, been very satisfactory, but experience has shown that certain modifications are desirable, and these are being embodied in a second experimental board now under construction. An additional station on an existing rural party line was provided at Glanmire. The party-line system is not, however, a success. There are only 7 such lines in all.

Deputies may be interested in the development of automatic telephones, and I may mention that the principal feature in connection with the telephone service during the past year was the decision to convert the Dublin Central Exchange from manual to automatic working. The automatic exchanges already installed have given excellent service since their inception a few years ago. Nevertheless, before deciding that subscribers connected to the Central Exchange, the replacement of which had become essential on account of the worn-out condition of the plant, should also be on the automatic system, it was considered desirable, in view of the heavy cost involved, that the proposals of the Department's technical officers for reconstruction should be examined by a special Committee, which should include foreign experts of repute. The foreign experts were the President of the Telephone Service in Germany and the Director of the Telephone Service in Sweden, and the Committee after close examination of the proposals unanimously decided that they should be adopted without modification. Under the proposals the subscribers—nearly 4,000 in all —connected to the Central Exchange will be transferred to the Ship Street and Merrion Street Auto Exchanges, and the question whether it will be necessary to reconstruct the Central Exchange on a large scale, or whether its future use can be confined to trunk purposes, is being left over for decision in the light of general conditions and development a year hence. Finance authority has been received, a contract has been placed for the extension of the two existing auto exchanges and installation work is proceeding rapidly. The "Main Frame" extensions, i.e., as distinct from the automatic installations, will be carried out by a Dublin firm.

It is hoped that about 300 of the Central Exchange subscribers will be on the automatic system by next month, and that the change over of all subscribers will be completed by the end of the year. These subscribers are probably now on the automatic system, as this statement was prepared over a month ago. The change to automatic working involves the change of telephone numbers in all cases, but whether the subscribers remain permanently connected to Merrion Street and Ship Street, or are ultimately replaced on a reconstructed Central Exchange no further change of numbers will be involved. It would be well if it were generally known that the coin boxes used in connection with the automatic system will enable telegrams to be phoned from Call Offices. This is not practicable under the existing manual system. The Committee also recommended, and it has been decided that, subject to the financial aspect in each case being satisfactory, all the outlying exchanges, including Dun Laoghaire, Blackrock, Killiney, Rathmines, etc., etc., shall ultimately be automatic. Conversion in these cases will, however, only take place as renewal of the exchanges is necessary. After the Central Exchange, Rathmines, which is also in an obsolete condition, will be the first to be taken up. It is hoped that it can be taken in hand next year. The Committee made an inspection of certain provincial exchanges and gave general consideration to the question of provincial extensions. They were, however, unable to suggest any improvement or alteration in the attitude already adopted by the Department, and considered that in the conditions obtaining in this country the policy of gradual, step by step development, the circumstances of each locality being considered and dealt with on their merits, was on entirely sound lines. In regard to the finances of the telephone system, there seems to be a misconception, as there is a general opinion that as the system expands it must necessarily become more remunerative. That is not quite the case. It is difficult to make the telephone service absolutely a paying one. In that connection I might, perhaps, quote the statement that I made last year, in which I said:

"Ordinarily in an expanding business, proportionately to expansion, expenses on the unit basis have a tendency to decrease as expansion takes place. This rule does not apply to the telephone services. Overhead expenses do not, of course, increase in the same proportion as the number of telephones. The cost of apparatus tends to fall. The savings effected on these are offset to a large extent, if not altogether, by the increased expense in cost of the plant necessary to provide ready means of communication between the increased number of users of the telephone. Exchange plant and staff increase out of proportion to the number of added subscribers. In effect the advantage which the user of the telephone gets from development and extension is not cheaper rates, but an increased service, i.e., a greater number of persons with whom he can talk."

The same remark applies to England, where the telephone surplus is decreasing as expansion takes place. Though overhead costs are reduced there is not a corresponding reduction in the cost of maintenance and operating expenses. The public, however, get a better and wider service. On the question of extension in areas outside our cities, I should say that it is one that is receiving very considerable consideration. Connected with that is the question of rural telephone extensions. An endeavour has been made to urge on farmers the desirability of taking up party-lines, but I must admit that it has not been successful. I have given the question of the extension of telephone services to rural areas considerable thought. The conclusion I arrived at is that the extension of the party-line system to any considerable extent in this country is not feasible, and that the expansion of telephone services in non-city areas must to a large extent depend on how it is taken up by residents and business people in smaller towns. Advantage has not been taken of the system in smaller towns to an extent which might reasonably be expected. It is hard to expect that farmers living in districts surrounding country towns would instal telephones when they know that if they did they would not be able to get into direct touch with business people in the towns. In this connection it must be noted that conditions here are different to those in most countries, and it so happens that our means of communication in regard to roads and so forth are exceptionally good, and consequently there is not the desire to instal telephones that there is in other countries where such means of communication are not so good or where postal facilities are not so frequent or so good.

In this connection it might be interesting to give figures showing the number of telephones per one hundred of the population in various countries. In the United States it is 15.3, Canada 12.6, Mexico 0.4, Belgium 2.2, Denmark 9.2, Netherlands 3.0, New Zealand 9.5, Germany 4.2, Great Britain and Northern Ireland 3.3, Poland 0.5, and the Irish Free State 0.9. On this list we come lowest with the exception of Poland and Mexico. Other figures which may be of interest to Deputies are the number of calls per head of the population. In 1927-28 the total number of trunk calls was 1,515,000, and in 1928-29 the number was 1,709,000. In 1927-28 the number of local calls was 17,345,000, and in 1928-29 the number was 19,088,000. The number of calls per head of the population in 1927-28 was 6.3, and in 1928-29 it was 7.0. That shows a slight but definite increase in the total number of calls per head of the population. It may be of interest to know that we have now telephonic communication with exchanges that are in direct communication with Dublin from the greater portion of Europe. I have a list of countries with which we can communicate direct from the Saorstát by telephone, but I do not think it is necessary to read it at this stage. The provision of fifteen telephone kiosks in Dublin and suburbs, in addition to the one at College Green, has been decided on, of which the following nine have already been erected:— Blessington Street, Eden Quay, Burgh Quay, Westmoreland Street, Phibsboro' Road, Parkgate Street, Dolphin's Barn Street, Harrington Street, Ranelagh, at the Angle. The remaining six kiosks will be located at:—St. Stephen's Green, Leinster Road (opposite the Free Library), Baggot Street Hospital, Merrion Gates, Ballsbridge and Pembroke Road (near cab shelter).

Mr. Byrne

Are there any on the north side?

Mr. Heffernan

There is one at Parkgate Street and another at Phibsboro'. Passing now from telephones to the telegraph section, I may say that there were no serious dislocations of the telegraph service during the year and, generally speaking, the stability of the various circuits comprising the telegraph system was satisfactory. The improvement in this respect must be attributed, in a large measure, to the policy pursued in recent years of removing telegraph superpositions from telephone circuits whenever a favourable opportunity has presented itself. Two new telegraph offices were opened during the year. The policy of replacing sounder instruments by telephones at offices where telegraph traffic has declined, and permits of this course, is being continued, and during the past year 18 offices were dealt with in this manner. Prior to 1922 there were 58 telegraph offices at which an obsolete type of instrument known as the "A.B.C." was in use. This instrument is antiquated, cumbersome and costly to maintain, and in conjunction with plans for extension of the telephone system the number of offices using this instrument has, by the substitution of telephone working, been decreased to 4. During 1928-29 the number of those offices dealt with was 9, and the remaining four will probably be converted during the present year.

The number of telegrams forwarded during the year 1927-28 was (ordinary), 2,929,957, and in 1928-29 the number was 2,411,806. The number of Press pages in 1927-28 was 91,674, and in 1928-29 it was 87,477. The number of messages delivered in 1927-28 was (ordinary) 3,091,219, and in 1928-29 the number was 2,601,115. The number of Press pages delivered in 1927-28 was 139,970, and in 1928-29 the number was 137,086. Deputies who may be inclined to compare these figures with those given in last year's statement should remember that the figures given last year for the year 1927-28 were necessarily estimates, and were only approximate figures. They had to be changed when the actual figures were ascertained. These changes were only slight and will make no real difference in any conclusions drawn from them. In regard to the number of Press pages there was a mistake last year in quoting the number of Press telegrams rather than the number of pages. Press telegrams are generally quoted in numbers of pages. That does not necessarily mean a page but rather a certain number of words. Last year the number of Press telegrams was quoted instead of the number of Press pages. It may be taken that the number of Press pages quoted here are accurate in so far as they relate to 1927-28, and they are as accurate as they can be for the year 1928-29, as we have not yet got the actual figures. The indications from these figures are that ordinary telegrams both forwarded and delivered show a decrease of about 16 per cent., and that the number of Press telegrams shows a slight decrease.

The number of telegrams per head delivered, contrasting the year 1923-24 with 1928-29, are, respectively, 1.25 and 0.9. A similar contrast in regard to the number of telephone messages shows that the figures for 1923-24 was 5.4 and for 1928-29 it was 7.0. That indicates a general extension and increase in the number of telephone messages per head of the population, and a contraction in number of telegraph messages. In that connection I might also give some figures showing the number of telegrams per head in various countries. This is the list: Australia 3.1, Belgium 0.7, Canada 1.4, Denmark 0.6, France 1.3, Germany 0.6, Great Britain and Northern Ireland 1.3, the United States 1.9, and the Irish Free State 0.9. The reason I give these figures is that they indicate that the Irish Free State is but one of many countries where the number of telegrams per head of the population is comparatively trifling and that the general tendency is to increase telephone communication as compared with telegraphic communication.

Mr. O'Hanlon

How far is the reduction in telegrams due to the extra charge?

Mr. Heffernan

Before dealing with the question of the effect of the increased charge, perhaps it might be well to give an indication to the House of the general tendency of telegraphic traffic, because that in itself must indicate the policy that is to be followed. Speaking last year on the same subject, I said:—

....The telegraphs, which are gradually yielding to the telephones, may be regarded as being in a transitional and declining stage. It may be taken, however, that although a declining service, it is not a dying one, and will remain essential to the comfort and welfare of certain members of the community. Owing to the necessity for maintaining our lines in good working order, and the impossibility of reducing the staff in exact proportion to the declining revenue, our unit loss on telegraphs may possibly be greater as traffic decreases. On the other hand, a traffic increase, while decreasing the unit loss, might possibly increase the gross loss.

As a matter of fact, what is indicated in the paragraph I have quoted is practically what has happened—the revenue taken on the basis of the old rate of charge has decreased. The unit loss per telegram has increased, but the gross loss on the telegram—that is the loss to the Post Office service and to the State —on the telegraph system has decreased.

If I were to outline the policy which must naturally develop from the trend of the telegraph and telephone traffic, it would be that the telegraph service, as reduced to present proportions, may be regarded as an essential service, necessary to provide means of rapid communication between persons who could not otherwise get into quick communication with each other. As it is a subsidised service, it should be provided at the least possible cost to the general taxpayer. It must not be subsidised to the extent of adversely affecting the traffic of the telephone service, which is an expanding service, practically self-supporting, and absolutely essential as part of the system of agricultural and industrial development.

Dealing with the question of increased charges, the precise figures are not available at present, but the estimated figures which are available will serve to give a general indication of the effect of the increased charge of sixpence per telegram. Before entering into details of the effect of this charge, I want to point out that it was originally proposed to enforce this charge in the Budget resolutions, but it was found that it was not practicable to enforce it until a much later date, so that the increased charge did not come into operation until 1st August. The following statistics of telegraph finances may be of interest. In 1927-28, the expenditure under the head of Telegraphs was £378,016, and in 1928-29, £355,100, showing a decrease in expenditure of £22,916. The revenue for 1927-28 was £223,733, and the revenue in 1928-29 was £223,610, showing a decrease of £123. The revenue was approximately the same as in the previous year. The loss on the telegraph service for the year 1927-28 was £154,283. The loss on the same service in 1928-29 was £131,490, showing a decrease in the loss of £22,793.

I want to point out that it was not stated at any time that the revenue from the telegraph service would increase by the amount of the anticipated saving. In this connection I want to quote a statement made by me last year which indicates my views as to what the effect would be:—

"It should be mentioned that in the statistical statement furnished in this Estimate no cognisance is taken of the effect of the imposition of the additional charge of 6d. to the minimum rate for telegrams. This change is estimated to effect a saving of about £66,000. This saving will be reflected in the deficit shown on the telegraphs and in the deficit shown on the general accounts. It will reduce the total estimate deficit on the general accounts for the year to £263,000."

I might say that the position is much more favourable than anticipated, as the amount of the deficit on the general accounts is not likely to exceed £194,000.

Mr. O'Hanlon

Will the extra sixpence bring in anything like the £66,000?

Mr. Heffernan

I want to emphasise that it was not indicated that the revenue from the telegraph service would increase by the estimated amount of £66,000, but it was estimated that a saving of that amount approximately would be made, and that this saving might be made in various ways or by a combination of various ways. It might be made by an increase in the revenue from the telegraph service; by a decrease in expenditure; by an abnormal accession of revenue to another service, due to the increased charge; or by the prevention of loss in the service which would otherwise have occurred. As a matter of fact, what has happened is a combination of these various ways by which we said a saving might be made. The estimated saving was £66,000 for twelve months or at the rate of £44,000 for eight months, so that in so far as it is necessary to justify the estimate of savings to be made it is only necessary to justify £44,000, because the £66,000 was the estimated saving for twelve months.

Mr. O'Hanlon

We do not know whether it is a debit or a credit.

Mr. Heffernan

I should say that the loss on the telegraph service is about five times greater than the postal, and four times more than the telephone, although the telegraph revenue is only one-ninth of the revenue earned by the combined services. The tendency of telegraph revenue was to decline, and of loss to increase. As the telegraph service was subsidised to a considerably greater extent than either of the other services, the Dáil, on the proposal of the Minister for Finance, agreed last year to an increase in the telegraph rates in order that the service would be made less unprofitable to the taxpayers by requiring the telegraph user to bear a more equitable proportion of the cost of handling his telegrams. It was made clear at the time that the higher rates would only reduce the loss— there would still remain a big deficit which cannot be cleared by internal economies.

The Dáil will probably expect to know what the effect of the increased rates has been. At this stage it is not possible to give precise information on that point. The increased rates have only been in force since August last, i.e., two-thirds of the financial year, and moreover the commercial accounts, only from which definite conclusions can be taken, will not be completed before October next. It is, however, possible from certain statistics available to give an indication of the effect of the extra rates. In the four months of the financial year—April to July —when the old rates were in force it is found that the declining traffic in telegrams was responsible for a loss in revenue of about £5,900, or at the rate of £17,700 for a full year. The decrease in traffic was 8 per cent. After the introduction of the new rates in August the rate of traffic decline increased to 25 per cent, but a revenue improvement at the rate of £6,000 a year took place.

It must not be assumed that a decrease in telegraph business involves a loss of revenue to the Post Office. The quick communication services of the telegraph and the telephone carry between them an increasing amount of traffic, but there is a diversion from the one to the other. The higher telegraph rates have accelerated that diversion. It need hardly be pointed out that a transfer of business from a service carrying a heavy and permanent loss to a service which at present is almost self-supporting, and which tends to become wholly self-supporting, is on sound financial lines. The revenue from telephones during the past year increased abnormally—by about £29,000—and of that increased revenue a substantial proportion— the exact amount cannot be ascertained—represents business transferred from the telegraphs. The decrease or the diversion of telegraph traffic has enabled economies to be effected in that branch of the service. The full effect of such economies will not be felt in the past year's working which, however, will show a reduction in expenditure of £23,000. That amount will, it is expected, be increased to at least £26,000 during the present year.

To sum up the arguments that I have been giving in regard to the increased charge on telegrams and to show that the anticipated saving of £44,000 for eight months of the financial year is taken into account I think it would be well to give a summary of the figures that I have already given in general terms. I pointed out if Deputies approached this from the point of view of anticipated increase of revenue from telegraphic services they were looking for something which we never attempted to show would happen. We did foreshadow that a saving at the rate of £44,000 for the eight months would take place. As a matter of fact, we are satisfied that savings of that amount in the various services of the Post Office due to this particular charge have taken place. To sum up, the anticipated savings for the full twelve months was £66,000; the anticipated saving for the eight months, 1st August, 1928, to 31st March, 1929, was £44,000. The loss in revenue— 1st April to 31st July, 1928, was £5,900. Therefore, the proportionate loss in revenue for the twelve months ended 31st March, 1929, was £17,700. The estimated revenue for the year 1928-29 was £223,610, and the estimated total revenue for 1927-28 was £223,733.

To explain these figures again, what they indicate is that a loss is shown in the first three months of the financial year of £5,900 and that there would have been a loss in revenue of £17,700 at the end of the financial year, whereas in actual fact the revenue was approximately equal to the revenue for the previous year, so that it indicates that a rectification of revenue to the extent of £17,700 took place because of the increased charge of sixpence on telegrams. Allowing in addition for the decrease in expenditure as a result of the reduction in traffic the actual decrease was more than this, but we allowed for the decrease in expenditure which we believe was directly attributable to the increased charge and to the decreased number of telegrams of a sum of £20,000, and that added to £17,000 makes a sum of £37,000. In addition to that we must allow for an abnormal increase in telephone revenue caused by the diversion from telegraphy of £8,000, and all these figures show a total of £45,000, which accounts for the saving of £44,000, which we estimated would take place. There is no doubt there was an abnormal increase in telephone revenue. It increased at a very much greater rate than in previous years. To anybody who follows these figures—and I acknowledge it is rather difficult to follow them on an occasion of this kind; they are really figures which would be much better dealt with if we were sitting round a committee table, but as Deputies wished to have them I have given them—they indicate that we are satisfied that the saving anticipated on the telegraph service because of the increased charge of sixpence has been effected. The matter can be approached from various other angles, but no matter how you approach it it tends to show that a considerable saving has been effected in the Post Office service because of the increased charge.

Passing from the telegraph service side to the stores branch, which is another comparatively important section of the departmental working of the Post Office, I want to say that during the year 1928 the contracts placed by this branch were as follows: contracts to the extent of £216,937 on Saorstát manufactured articles; £41,946 on British manufactured articles; £55,088 on articles produced in other countries. The reduction in purchases as compared with 1927 is largely due to reduced Army and engineering requirements. The Post Office Stores Department acts as a purchasing branch for various other departments. The sum of £11,053 was spent on purchasing outside An Saorstát articles which could be manufactured within An Saorstát. This was due to the fact that the lowest prices quoted by Saorstát manufacturers were not within the preference percentage allowed by the Minister for Finance in favour of goods produced in An Saorstát. During 1928 a total preference of £3,085 was granted on contracts to the value of £216,937 placed in An Saorstát.

The question of obtaining increased supplies of stores from foreign sources is still being actively pursued, more especially in the case of items which are under the control of British ring firms. The principal items procured from places outside Great Britain during the year were:—154½ miles lead covered cable at a cost of £8,134; 34,400 insulators at a cost of £510; 102½ tons bronze and copper wire at a cost of £15,328. There are various other activities of a very important and interesting character carried out through the branch.

Before concluding I want to deal with one or two of the comparatively unknown activities of the Post Office. They are not very well known to the general public and might be of considerable advantage to them. There is the express delivery system. I want to inform Deputies that all information in connection with these matters is to be found in the Post Office Guide. It is also not generally known that there is such a thing as express delivery of messages sent by telephones. Rules governing this are to be found in the Post Office Guide on page 275. On account of the decreased use of the telegraph it may not be known to the general public that it is within their power to send messages by phone from any place where a telegraph call office exists to any other telephone exchange and when the message reaches that exchange it will be written down and forwarded by express messenger to the person to whom the message is being sent, and will fulfil to a large extent the functions of telegrams and will be cheaper. The only charge will be the ordinary charge of sending a telephonic message and the payment, approximately the payment for the delivery of telegrams, to be paid to the express messenger who is sent out with the telegram. There are also railway letters and there is cash on delivery, which is not taken advantage of to the extent to which it might. There is also a phonogram by which messages can be sent and received by telephone.

The Post Office Department is, I believe, the largest employer of labour in the State, the established staff employed by the Post Office Department numbering 4,397, the unestablished staff being 8,135, the grand total being 12,532. The service given by the staff in the Post Office during the past year has, in my opinion, been satisfactory. I believe that, generally speaking, it will be found that the Post Office officials have been attentive to their duties and courteous to the public. Promotion in the Post Office is necessarily somewhat slow. The various grades in the Post Office are such that the lowest paid servants employed are far the greater number of the officials of the Post Office Department and the higher posts, what might be called the plums of the service, are comparatively few. It is, however, a fact that avenues are open to promotion to all, from the highest to the lowest, and that a boy messenger can hope to attain any position in the Post Office service. As a matter of fact, all the higher officials of the Post Office have graduated from the ranks of the Post Office service.

Mr. Anthony

What about the Parliamentary Secretary?

Mr. Heffernan

The General Post Office, it is expected, will be open in July of this year. It may be of interest to the Dáil to know that it is the intention of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs to issue a centenary commemoration stamp in connection with the O'Connell Centenary. Owing to the short time at our disposal we have been rather rushed in our preparations of this stamp, but the preliminary engravings have been prepared, and it is hoped that a stamp will be available for issue around the time of the actual centenary celebrations.

In conclusion, I want again to emphasise the statement which I made at the beginning that the Post Office Department is the nearest approach to a business undertaking of any Department of the State, and that on that account it is not too much to ask that Deputies should approach it from the point of view of its being a business undertaking, and that as far as possible controversial and political matters should be kept apart from a discussion of this kind.

As far as the policy of the Post Office is concerned, it seems to me within the limits set to it by Parliament that it should be our policy to bring it as closely as possible within the limits of a commercial undertaking. We have been hampered in that regard by the fact that we inherited a system which was devised for a country with much greater resources than ours, and a much thicker population, but we feel satisfied that, taking into account the special circumstances applicable to this country, the services rendered by the Post Office are as satisfactory as could be expected.

Mr. Anthony

I move that the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration. Before I enter into any criticism of the Estimate itself, I must certainly pay a tribute to the Parliamentary Secretary for his staying powers. He has certainly given us a very exhaustive account of the activities of the Post Office service, so much so, that whilst he has displayed an amount of staying power himself, I am afraid the Deputies could not stand up to it. If the statement of the Parliamentary Secretary were prepared with a view to confusing the House, he could not have done better. Also, if he had done nothing else than helping to prepare such a long-winded statement, then I say he must be very industrious. It is only right, perhaps, at the beginning that I should pay a tribute also to the courtesy and efficiency of post and telegraph officials as a whole. I certainly join with the Parliamentary Secretary in that tribute at least. The Parliamentary Secretary said in his opening remarks, amongst other things, that Deputies should endeavour to discuss this Vote from the point of view of a business proposition rather than that of public utility. I think our aim should be rather the other way about, and that those words should be transposed, and that we should endeavour to approach this question from the point of view of public utility rather than that of a business or commercial proposition. Surely, the Parliamentary Secretary will admit that in every civilised country the Post Office and such social services as these are never looked upon as an ordinary commercial proposition, and it has never been suggested in the most modern countries that they should be a paying proposition when they render a decent public service.

I wish to draw attention to a matter which has occurred in Cork city. It has been considered, as part of the economy campaign, I suppose, necessary to discharge a number of workers from the Engineering department. These employees are mostly married men with dependants. The wages paid to these men are about £2 10s. 0d. a week. I think it will be conceded by anybody having any knowledge of the work performed by these men that they were not overpaid. They had of necessity to be absent from their homes for very long periods at a time, and their work is acknowledged to be of great importance and utility to the community. We may be told it is part of the policy of retrenchment and economy which the Government may feel necessary, but I would ask why begin this policy of retrenchment and economy on the lower paid wage earners. I suggest that there are many other avenues through which economy might be achieved, without throwing out of employment this very large number of men who for a time, of course, will be able to receive something in the nature of unemployment benefit through the labour exchanges and ultimately will be thrown on the rates. In the end the community will have to maintain these men and their families. I am not going to suggest for a moment that if these employees were going to be redundant in any way that the State should continue to employ them, but I do suggest that it is false economy. The work of maintenance and repair in the engineering branch, as most Deputies know, is not perhaps so apparent or obvious as that of the postal side. These men were engaged, as I have already said, many times long distances away from their homes and from their headquarters on the maintenance and repair of telegraph poles, wires, derricks, and so on. Whilst we here acclaim the virtues of the Minister for Agriculture, for instance, and whilst we subscribe largely to the great improvement he has brought about in regard to butter, eggs, and so on, I say that the very people who will suffer as a result of the curtailment of these social services will be the farmer, the shopkeeper and the merchant, to whom it is absolutely necessary to have quick and ready contact with the outside public. In my view, and in the view of any people who have given this matter any consideration, the policy of the Department should be greater efficiency. They are not going in this case to get better and more efficient service, but rather less service and less efficiency, with consequent loss to the country. We say that there is plenty of scope for the activities of these men. Going round the country, I have seen myself where certain of these services have been neglected.

They are badly in want of repair, and if that state of affairs is allowed to continue, some of these days we will have representations made from the Chambers of Commerce, Farmers' Associations and others as to the lack of services at perhaps the most crucial times in their business dealings. We know, from time to time, owing to the effects of a storm or gale, that wires are blown down and telegraph communication is delayed. We know that the elements, like some of our politicians in this country, are rather uncertain things, and at any moment there may be a breakdown in these services. It may occur when many of these trained and efficient men are scattered or perhaps rendered less efficient by a long term of unemployment, and I cannot understand the idea underlying what I suggest is false economy. We do know that the telegraph service is a ready and easy method of contact, and it is wrong, in my view, at this stage in our history, when we have development, particularly in agriculture, when we are expecting greater development, and when we are engaging in further enterprises, to interfere with this very vital and important service.

I do not like to have to make these comments. I recognise the good work that has been done in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I recognise that there are conditions in the service that are not the worst and that there are very many capable administrators in the service, courteous and efficient men, but I would not be doing my duty were I to let this Vote pass without comment, and commenting in the only possible way I can, that is to suggest to the House that this Vote should be referred back for further consideration. There are many Deputies in this House who have perhaps greater interest in these men than I have. I may be considered an altruist in this particular direction. These Deputies belong to every party, and I hope that they will make themselves articulate, as they have promised these men to protest against their discharge, because of the fact that they are not redundant and because the work is absolutely necessary.

I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that he would cause inquiry to be made in his Department to see if anything could be done to keep these men employed. I know the work is there, and I think the Parliamentary Secretary will admit, or his officials will admit that this maintenance work is absolutely essential. If the Parliamentary Secretary will undertake to do that, I will be prepared to withdraw my motion.

Mr. Lemass

The Parliamentary Secretary asked Deputies to approach the consideration of this Estimate in a somewhat different spirit from that in which they approached the consideration of other Estimates. I think it is due to the Parliamentary Secretary that we should congratulate him on having himself approached the consideration of this Estimate in a different spirit from that usually adopted by other Ministers. Unlike other Ministers, he has gone to considerable trouble to place at our disposal information relating to the work of his Department, which will be of considerable assistance in making up our minds as to whether it has been efficiently managed or not. Other Ministers, as Deputies will have noticed, are more anxious to conceal information relating to their Departments than to reveal it. Because of the information which the Parliamentary Secretary has placed at our disposal, we are able to judge more clearly the value of the services which the Department is giving to the people and the value we are getting for the cost it involves us in. If Ministers would take the same trouble to give Deputies information relating to their Departments, the discussion on these Estimates would in future be much more valuable than in the past.

There are special matters in relation to the Parliamentary Secretary's statement that we wish to make reference to. He will recollect that he invited us to approach the consideration of the Estimate and accounts in the same spirit as the members of a joint stock company would approach the consideration of the accounts of that company. If we were members of a joint stock company assembled to discuss the administration of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs during last year, I think most Deputies will admit that the first thing we would ask for would be the accounts. It is impossible for us to know whether our company is being efficiently managed and whether we are getting value for the money expended unless we have the accounts. We have not got them. It is now over three years since the accounts of the Department were published. In 1926 the accounts for the previous four years were published and nothing has appeared since. I do not see how we can approach the consideration of the work done by this Department in anything like a critical spirit unless we have the accounts made available. No satisfactory explanation has been given as to why they are not made available. Some time ago I asked the Minister for Finance why the commercial accounts for the years 1926-27 and 1927-28 had not been published, and he informed me that the accounts for the year 1926-27 had been audited, and would be published in due course. That is not good enough. It is not fair to the Dáil to ask Deputies to vote a very large sum of money in respect of a Department concerning which we have only estimated figures when there are available audited accounts of the working of that Department for the year 1926-27. It is not asking too much that the accounts for 1926-27 should be made available in the year 1929. We would be justified in demanding that the accounts for the year 1927-28 should be made available in 1929. If we are going to get only the accounts of the Department for four years, then I do not think the Parliamentary Secretary should ask us to approach the consideration of his Estimate as members of a joint stock company would approach the consideration of the affairs of that company. The Post Office is a commercial Department. It should be considered as such, even though Deputies might be reconciled to that Department being worked at an annual loss.

An Ceann Comhairle

took the Chair.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Anthony has stated that it is never suggested in any other country that the Post Office should be a paying concern. I do not know where Deputy Anthony gets his information, but, as far as I have been able to discover, there are very few countries in which the Post Office is not actually a paying concern. It certainly is in Great Britain, and there is no reason whatever why it should not be made a paying concern here. I do not mean to suggest when I say it should be made a paying concern that staffs should be dismissed unnecessarily, that wages should be cut down, or that other hardships are to be inflicted on the community. You can make it a paying concern without reducing the services given or the wages paid to the workers which, in many cases, are abnormally low. The deficit upon the working of the Post Office has been very substantially reduced, as the Parliamentary Secretary informed us, since 1922. He estimates this year that it will not exceed £194,000. He appears to have erected in his mind a barrier against any further reduction. He seems to take it for granted that in this country, because of the special conditions that prevail, with a preponderance of the rural over the urban population, the actual wiping out of the deficit is not possible. If it has been possible to reduce it by £900,000 in seven years, I think with very little additional effort it can be made completely to disappear, and we might possibly have in this country, even as in England, an annual surplus in the Post Office which could be used for the relief of general taxation, for the reduction of postal charges, or the extension of services. The fact that the deficit has been reduced does not indicate that all is well with the Post Office expenditure. The estimate for 1929-30 is only 3.4 per cent. less than the actual expenditure for 1927-28. Despite the fact that during that period there has been a fairly substantial automatic drop in salaries and wages, due to a fall in the cost of living index figure, I think the decrease in the amount paid in wages, due to that fall in the cost of living, exceeds the actual reduction in Post Office expenditure. The net expenditure in the Post Office since 1922 fell slowly until the year 1926-27, when it rose, and in the year 1927-28 the net expenditure actually exceeded the expenditure for the year 1926-27.

Mr. Heffernan

On a point of explanation, I think the Deputy is misinformed. I understood him to say the expenditure for 1927-28 showed an increase as compared with 1926-27.

Mr. Lemass

The net expenditure.

Mr. Heffernan

As shown in the commercial accounts, the expenditure has progressively decreased for all years since 1922. The expenditure for 1926-27 as shown by the commercial accounts was £2,357.715, and for 1927-28 the net expenditure on all services was £2,335,059, which shows an increase of something like £22,000. I think the Deputy must have wrong figures, because there was a progressive decrease.

Mr. Lemass

I can only go upon the figures available in the Appropriation Accounts and the Estimates. I have already pointed out the commercial account has not been made available to the Deputies for these years. However, that is a minor matter, and there is no need why we should actually spend much time over it. But it does appear that the figures for all the years show that there has been a very considerable slowing up in the decline of expenditure. On the other hand, as I was pointing out, the payments to the Exchequer in 1927-28 were less than in the year 1923-4, though in excess of the two previous years. The estimated net receipts for 1928-29 are less than the year 1927-28. I know that merely making statements like that is of very little value, because anyone can play tricks with figures. The Parliamentary Secretary, consciously or unconsciously, has been playing some tricks with figures in the course of his statement. I might possibly be accused of playing tricks with figures. We could each prove each other incapable of telling the truth by twisting figures. But twisting figures carries us nowhere.

When we come to examine the position in the various branches of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs we get a clearer insight into what the actual position is. First of all, let us take the Postal Department. The estimated loss for the Postal Department for this year is £27,000. That is a very considerable improvement on each of the previous years since the Post Office was taken over by the Free State Government. It is something upon which the Deputies of all parties can congratulate themselves. It will be noted, however, that it is only in the actual item of letters that there is in fact a gain. Possibly the decline in the deficit is due not so much to an increase in the efficiency of the service, but to a decline in the volume of those items which represent the annual loss. There is a gain and there has always been a gain from the letters. But in printed matter, papers, newspapers, postal packets, registered correspondence and money orders there has been a loss.

Mr. Heffernan

These have all increased. The numbers have increased. The numbers of the non-paying services have practically increased since last year.

Mr. Lemass

I am not quite clear. Does the Parliamentary Secretary mean to imply that the loss is less this year than last year?

Mr. Heffernan

The total loss is less. The number of non-paying articles has increased. Therefore, the increase in the gain is due to the saving on the essential paying portion of the service.

Mr. Lemass

When we come to this proposition as to how the Post Office can be made a paying service and how the annual deficit can be wiped out, we have got to examine all these items in the postal grants which represent the loss, printed matter, papers, newspapers, postal packets, registered correspondence, money orders, and so on. Every one of these items, each single one of these items handled by the Post Office represents a loss recorded. If the number of items are to be substantially increased, I take it that the loss would be increased, though not in the proportion of the increase in the number.

Similarly, if the service were wiped out altogether, the Post Office would stand to gain by the amount of the annual loss. For instance, last year the Parliamentary Secretary estimated that the loss upon the sending of newspapers at a special rate through the post was £70,000. It seems to us that the sending of newspapers through the post at a special rate is in the nature of a subsidy to commercial concerns. Newspapers are commercial concerns formed for profit, and when the taxpayers are asked to foot a bill of £70,000 each year in order to enable these concerns to get their goods to the people at a specially low rate, that is, in my opinion, unreasonable, in view of our financial and economic position. It will be, however, very difficult to make out a strong case for it. It seems to me that there is, on the other hand, a very strong case for our readjusting rates so as to wipe out that loss. If the practice of sending newspapers through the post were discontinued, we would gain £70,000. That is the meaning of these figures. If the sending of these papers through the post was to continue and the rates increased, this loss of £70,000 would be wiped out.

It is notable from the figures which the Parliamentary Secretary has made available, that the number of newspapers delivered here exceeds the number posted by something over two millions. Two millions, therefore, represent the foreign newspapers which come in here through the post in the year. I do not know if the International Convention to which the Post Office here subscribed would rule out any possibility of collecting a delivery charge on those foreign newspapers. Possibly it would. I take it they are not considered to be parcels, and I understand only parcels are to be exempt from the International Convention. But if it would be possible to devise any scheme by which the delivery charge would be collected upon foreign newspapers coming into this country, it would, I believe, be a very useful plan to adopt, because not merely would it help to reduce the Post Office deficit considerably, but it would help traders in this country by inducing the persons requiring those newspapers to buy them from the shop instead of getting them direct from the producer.

The loss upon registered correspondence is estimated at £145,000. It was pointed out here last year that this loss is due to the fact that the registration fee is not sufficient to cover all the processes involved in dealing with valuable mail items. Again, it seems to us that persons requiring the advantages of registration should not expect the general taxpayer to subsidise him. If I wish to send a letter or parcel in a special manner to somebody throughout the country I should be prepared to pay whatever the extra cost is involved in sending that letter in that special manner.

When a person registers his letter or parcel he is merely asking the Post Office to take special care of it. There is no other advantage in it, because, unlike the system that exists in other countries, that packet will be delivered at the address, not necessarily to the individual. In France and in other places the postman will not deliver a packet except to the actual person, or to the person who claims to be the actual person. If that person is not convenient the postman will not deliver it. He will take it back again. Here the postman delivers it at the address and takes the signature of any person in the house for that packet. Apart altogether from that, it is my view that the fees for registration could reasonably be increased so as to reduce that loss of £145,000 by half.

I find that on the delivery of parcels there is an estimated loss of £90,000. It is probably a very rough estimate. We find that the parcels delivered exceed the numbers posted by approximately one million. That is a figure anyway given for the year 1928-29 by the Parliamentary Secretary. The estimate for 1926-27 was much lower. In that year the number delivered in excess of the number posted was only 400,000, so that it would appear from the Post Office Estimate there is a very substantial increase in the number of parcels delivered here and the number posted outside the country.

That increase in the number of parcels is possibly due to the practice which has grown up of shopping by post. Most Deputies who read any of the English newspapers know that there are large pages of advertisements asking persons to send a deposit of sixpence or a postal order to get their articles direct from the manufacturer. In that way a fairly substantial trade has been built up between this country and England. A number of people adopt the advice given in the advertisements and get over these parcels by post. As a result of that shopkeepers here have been complaining of a considerable loss of trade, and it seems reasonable that the Government should be asked to take action to stop that practice, which is detrimental to Irish industry and to the national revenue. Some years ago a delivery charge of sixpence was imposed on such parcels, and the immediate effect was to reduce the number coming in considerably, but that was only temporary. The number of parcels coming in from outside now is actually in excess of what it was before the additional charge of sixpence was imposed. In any case, if we are faced with a loss of £90,000 on the delivery of such parcels, I think it is time that we should seriously consider an increase of that charge.

If we were to wipe out that loss or reduce it considerably we would be doing the taxpayer a good turn, and by interfering with that particular form of traffic we would be doing the traders of this country a good turn also. The fact that there is a substantial trade of that kind going on is also borne out by the figures given by the Parliamentary Secretary in relation to postal orders. The number issued in this country exceeds substantially the number cashed by over £160,000. We can take it that that gives additional proof that the practice of sending postal orders to England for goods to be sent back by post has increased considerably. When we find on the one hand that the number of postal orders issued exceeded the number cashed and that the number of parcels delivered exceeded the number posted we can conclude that that is so. So much for the postal services.

Now I want to get to the telegraph services, with particular reference to the additional charge of sixpence which was imposed last year. The Parliamentary Secretary estimated last year that the deficit on the Telegraph Department would be £101,500. Now he informs us that he estimates that loss at £131,490. The expenditure upon telegraph services, he also stated, decreased by £23,000, while the revenue remained stationary, the loss being approximately £23,000 less than that in the previous year. If we examine these figures we will understand the full significance of what has happened as a result of the imposition of the additional charge. We find that the people paid the same amount for telegraph services, but received considerably less service. I recollect, in a discussion on the Telegraph Bill last year, that numerous Deputies on these benches pointed out that the decline in the use of telegrams as a result of the increased charge would almost inevitably be such as to ensure that there would be no increase of revenue. The figures given by the Parliamentary Secretary now bear us out. Instead of there being an estimated saving of £66,000 as a result of the increased charge, there is only a saving of £22,000. The Parliamentary Secretary may attempt to prove that the increase in the use of telephones was such as to compensate for the decrease in the estimated saving on telegrams. I think that he has given no figures to prove that the increase in telephones this year has been, in fact, anything more than normal. There has been a steady increase in the use of the telephone service during the last three or four years. It does not appear that the increase has grown with any abnormal rapidity this year.

Reverting to telegrams, we find that the revenue has not increased, but has remained stationary. Despite the fact that an additional charge of sixpence was imposed, there was no increase under that heading, but, if the people paid the same amount in that respect, the actual amount of service they received was less by an amount represented in cash by £23,000 or, as the Parliamentary Secretary informed us, by a twenty-five per cent. decreased use of telegrams. I am not quite sure if twenty-five per cent. was the figure which he gave. He said that it was eight per cent. in the four months before the charge was imposed, and twenty-five per cent. in the next eight months. When we examine the figures given in the commercial accounts for telegraphs we find that there has been no reduction in the administrative cost corresponding with the decline in the use of services. It is possible that such reductions could not take place because, as the Parliamentary Secretary pointed out, as the service declined the unit loss, or the loss on each individual telegram, was increased. That tendency has been considerably accentuated by the increased charge. I doubt if the increased charge will help the Post Office to balance its accounts. It seems that the attitude which was taken up by those who opposed the increased charge last year was correct and that we would have had a smaller loss now if the charge had been left the same. It does not seem at all clear to us that the reverse would have been the case.

When we come to consider the position of telephones, we get another situation. The loss upon the telephone service grew very rapidly from the year 1924 until last year. The charges were reduced in 1924, and since then there has been a very rapid increase in the loss on the service, an increase which it is hoped to arrest this year. The Parliamentary Secretary, in the course of his remarks, made repeated reference to the telephone branch as being a practically paying branch. I am not clear what he meant by that, as he estimated a loss on that branch this year at a figure which exceeded considerably the loss on the postal branch. It is not clear that a service, on which it is expected to lose £35,000, and on which we were losing only £3,000 in 1924, can be described as an almost paying service.

Mr. Heffernan

I presume the Deputy knows that there was a considerable decrease in charges in the year 1924.

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Heffernan

That accounts for the increased loss.

Mr. Lemass

Yes. I said that the loss since 1924, when the charges were decreased, has been increasing substantially. We hope that the Minister's estimated figure will be realised, as it would indicate that such a loss is being now actually reduced. We hope for a reversal of the tendency in future. The growth of the deficiency in the telephone service has, of course, been considerably accentuated by the fact that the capital liability has been increased, involving higher charges for depreciation and interest. It is noticeable, however, comparing the year 1924-25 with the year 1925-26, the last year for which we have the commercial accounts—I would not have selected these years if the figures for any later year were available—although there was a decrease of some £12,000 in revenue from rentals, there was an increase of practically the same amount, £12,800, in administrative expenses. Salaries went up by £12,937. The cost of maintenance was decreased by £3,920, although the cost of supervising the maintenance was increased by £788. In other words, although there has been a decrease in revenue and in the actual cost of maintaining the system, there is an increase in administrative costs and in the cost of supervising the maintenance of the system. That seems to indicate that as the visible source of supply dwindled, the demands made upon it increased. It does not suggest that there has been proper supervision over that department. If there had been, I think that with a growing deficit and a declining revenue, there would not have been any increase in administrative expenses at the same time.

On the occasion of the introduction of the Estimate last year I had occasion to draw attention to the very substantial increase that there had been in the staff of practically every one of the departments of the Post Office. In the Secretary's and Solicitor's Office, for example, a staff of 112 in 1922-23 and of 119 in 1923-24 became 127 for the year 1928-29. In the Accountant's Office the staff taken each year from 1922-23 was:—1922-23, 200; 1923-24, 200; 1924-25, 200; 1925-26, 211; 1926-27, 213; 1927-28, 273, and 1928-29, 273. Similarly, in the Stores Department the staff in 1922-23 was 114, in 1923-24, 136; in 1924-25, 149; in 1925-26, 145; in 1926-27, 150; in 1927-28, 164, and in 1928-29, 163. In the Engineering Branch, a staff of 489 in 1922-23 became 554 in 1924-25, 563 in 1925-26 and 574 this year. In practically every branch of the administrative side of the Post Office there has been that very steady increase in the number of officials. The staff of the Secretary's Office, of course, reached its maximum in the year 1924-25 and then declined, but the staffs of other headquarters offices continued their increase. The percentage increase between the year 1925-26 and the year 1928-29 is:—In the Accountant's Office, 29.4; in the Stores Department, 9.4; in the Engineer's Department, .9. There has been, of course, a decrease in the number of the staffs in the metropolitan and provincial offices. In other words, while the number of those actually carrying out the services of delivery and collecting the post has been decreased, the number of those directing them, the number of brass hats at the top, has been growing equally rapidly. If the staffs were in this year 1929-30 no higher than the number found necessary in the year 1925-26, there would be a saving of practically £25,000.

We do not wish to see any civil servants dismissed merely for the sake of having a reduced Estimate, but we do stand, and stand very firmly, for what has been called ruthless efficiency in all Government Departments. We do not think that there should be any man or any woman in the employment of the Government for whom there is not need and who is not quite competent to fulfil efficiently the duties of his or her position. It we want to provide relief for persons out of employment, we ought to provide relief by other means than employing them in Government offices. If there was need for a certain number of officials in the Post Office in the year 1925-26 there does not appear to have been any substantial increase in the work done by the Post Office as would necessitate the very substantial increase shown in the staff this year. The Estimate for the Stores Branch, for example, for this year shows an increase over actual expenditure for the year 1927-28 of £1,100, or almost 2 per cent.;

The Parliamentary Secretary and those who are directing the policy of the Post Office appear to think that because, let us say, of hard work in the past, or perhaps because they have been able by good fortune to reduce the deficit in a rather spectacular manner, they can now stop. That is not so. I do not think the efforts should be relaxed until the deficit is wiped out. There does not appear to be any reason why the Post Office in this country, as in Great Britain, should not be a paying service. The deficit this year, as estimated by the Parliamentary Secretary, is £194,000. If the various suggestions which I have made were put into operation it would be possible to change that deficit into a surplus without inflicting any undue hardship upon any section of the community. We could, for example, adjust the rate for newspapers, so as to wipe out the loss of £70,000. We cannot afford, in our present circumstances, to subsidise commercial firms of this sort. I do not believe in subsidies of that kind. Similarly, we are suffering an annual loss of £19,000 in giving special rates for the transmission of Press telegrams. That is a subsidy, and that could be so modified or abolished as to wipe out that loss. If that suggestion is adopted a sum of £89,000 will be taken off the deficit.

Similarly, if the additional parcel delivery fee which I suggest should be imposed, was decided upon, another saving of about £25,000 could be realised. The case for that is very strong without reference to the Post Office accounts at all. The growth of the practice of shopping by post with London houses is not something that we would like to encourage. It rests with the Post Office to stop it, and they can stop it with financial advantage to themselves. Also, if the suggestion which I made to increase the registration fee for registered correspondence, so as to reduce the loss upon that item by one half, was adopted, we would save another £75,000. Again, if the staff of the various headquarters offices were reduced in 1929 to the level that was found sufficient in 1926, another saving of £25,000 would be secured. There are in the service of the Post Office quite a number of officials with very high salaries—salaries of over £1,000 per year. If these officials, with salaries exceeding £1,000, were reduced to that figure, and if those just slightly under £1,000 were modified in a corresponding manner, without inflicting any considerable hardship upon the individuals concerned, because a man can live with some tolerable degree of comfort on £1,000 a year, there would be a saving of at least another £6,000 or £7,000. Certainly I think that saving should be effected before any reduction is attempted in the wages of men at the bottom, or any scheme adopted to diminish the services given by the Post Office which would involve the dismissal of those men at the bottom.

If the various suggestions which I have made—I can make other suggestions if necessary—were adopted, the deficit would be changed into a surplus. It might then be possible for us to consider the possibility of reducing the rates for postal delivery. The Parliamentary Secretary stated that if we were to reduce the letter rate from 2d. to 1½d., which is the English level, it would cost £241,000. I think I am correct in assuming that that estimate leaves out of account the possibility of increased business following a decrease of the rates. It is my belief that if the Post Office was, as the Parliamentary Secretary asked us to consider it, a joint stock company, and if we were the directors of that company facing up to the position, we would probably decide to reduce our charges rather than to increase them in that particular item of letters, which is, in fact, the only item paying at present. Because the letter post is paying us we should foster it, and I believe it would pay better still if the charge was reduced at least to the British level of 1½d. It is only in respect of services upon which we are suffering a steady annual loss that we should endeavour to place restrictions by way of increased charges, knowing that if these services disappear altogether we shall gain rather than lose. But in the matter of the delivery of letters the reverse is the case.

I put these propositions before the Parliamentary Secretary and I ask him to consider them. I know that he is anxious to put the Post Office upon a sound basis just as much as we are. He has repeatedly given expression to that view, not merely since his adherence to the Government Party, but before. I do not wish to re-open old sores by making reference to the various criticisms of the Post Office the Parliamentary Secretary was responsible for before the great turn-over, but I am sure that the Parliamentary Secretary, even in these days, cannot altogether forget the promises of his youth; and if he remembers them in time he will be anxious to try to take some steps to translate them into fact. He has an opportunity of doing what he himself suggested when he was in opposition, and I hope he will do it. He is not altogether going in the wrong direction; he is going in the right direction, and it merely requires an effort to speed up the work and to hasten the progress. But because it has not yet been done, and because we are not satisfied that the right spirit animates the higher officials of the Department, we are going to support Deputy Anthony's amendment. We feel that those responsible for the control of the Department—the higher officials—are too anxious to seek for economies at the bottom, to seek for economies by reducing services, or cutting salaries, or dispensing with the lower-paid employees, whereas if they set about the task properly they could obviate the necessity for that form of economy while, at the same time, putting the Post Office on a paying basis by tackling it in the manner indicated.

Mr. Shaw

I think the Parliamentary Secretary and the Post Office staff have reason to be congratulated on the statement that we have heard this evening. The Post Office is a gigantic machine, and I do not know that there is any Department in the State which has had to function under greater difficulties during the past six or seven years. A saving of £900,000 has been effected since 1922. Whilst we all would like to see and would encourage economy, and are glad that that saving has been effected, I should like to say that sometimes false economy is attempted. I am very pleased that the recent suggestion with regard to the reduction of services in the country, which would have saved £40,000, has been definitely abandoned. This curtailment of services would have penalised a very large number of deserving people who are in receipt of 13/-, 14/- or 15/- per week and who render very valuable service. They deliver letters round the country to persons who live at considerable distances, and I am pleased that that false economy has been definitely abandoned.

With regard to the telephone service, I must say that it is very much improved, and the figures which the Parliamentary Secretary has given are very interesting. The revenue was £343,000, and the expenditure £378,000, the deficit being £35,800. Certainly, it does seem some consolation to the subscribers that they are not blistered as much as I considered they were blistered, because the charges certainly appeared to be very high. From the figures that have been given here, it is apparent that the subscribers are gaining and that the Post Office is losing. There is one matter I should like to refer to which may not be generally known. It is in connection with fixed time calls. Any person can, by paying 25 per cent. more than the ordinary charges, get into direct communication at any time of the day or night with any place in Great Britain. If you want to talk to a person in London at 10 o'clock at night by going to the Post Office and asking for a fixed time call and paying 25 per cent. extra you can telephone to that person. I was glad to hear what the Parliamentary Secretary had to say in connection with provincial development, and I agree with him that step-by-step development is the best way, and that in connection with rural telephone extension success must depend on the support given by the business people in the smaller towns and the residents in the rural area. I hope that these extensions will be developed, because they are being very much used.

With regard to telegrams, I do not like the increased charge of sixpence. Whilst we may have made a saving, I know that it has done harm to us in Great Britain and Northern Ireland, where people have to pay 50 per cent. less for telegrams than we have to pay here. The result is that, as the figures have shown, people are using the telephone now instead of the telegraphic service. There has been a decrease of £23,000 on the telegraphic service and an increase of £29,000 on the telephone service. Taking everything into consideration. I am quite satisfied that great improvements have been made. I see no reason why this Vote should be referred back, and I am surprised that the amendment should come from the Labour Party, because, of course, the chief Opposition Party want to refer everything back, whether good or bad. I hope Deputy Anthony will see his way to withdraw his amendment.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

took the Chair.

Sir James Craig

I intend to vote against the amendment. I was unable to be present to hear the statement of the Parliamentary Secretary, but as I have criticised the Vote on previous occasions I want to make it perfectly clear that, although I am not quite satisfied with matters at the present time, I do not think that anything could be gained by referring it back. In the first place I congratulate the Executive Council in not carrying out their determination to lessen the postal services throughout the country by the dismissal of so many servants of the lower grade, as was contemplated. I think that was a very good thing indeed. There were two matters with regard to which I offered severe criticism on previous occasions, and one of these was the telephones. I have used a great deal of bad language in the past in regard to telephone operators, but I may say now, since the automatic machines have come into use, they have been a very great success. If we still have to ring up the Exchange, the same mistakes are still liable to occur, although I must also admit that the amount of incivility one gets now is very small compared with the amount of incivility one used to get in former years if one had a complaint to make.

The other point I was strong on was the fact that I could not get my letters in the morning until I came back to the house for lunch. I had been frequently summoned to a meeting of the Selection Committee of the Dáil and the letter did not reach me until one o'clock although it summoned me to a meeting that was to take place at eleven o'clock. The Parliamentary Secretary for Posts and Telegraphs has looked into that matter, and since he has made arrangements I have no cause for grumbling because the letters are now delivered in time. I am dissatisfied with three or four other points. I think it was a mistake to increase the cost of telegrams. I believe with Deputy Lemass that there is no question but that telegraphic communication would be used more frequently than it is if we had not put on this extra amount.

Deputy Shaw, I think, made a mistake as to what the cost of telegrams outside is. If a person in Northern Ireland should telegraph here it would cost him 1/6, whereas if he sent the same telegram to England it would only cost him 1/-. He pays the same as we pay for a telegram, so that it is, I suppose, a sort of retaliation. Deputy Lemass was perfectly right, to my mind, when he said that as far as the amount paid in letters is concerned, if we got back to the 1½d. postage there would be so much more communication and so many more stamps used as to more than make up for the deficit of £240,000 stated by the Parliamentary Secretary as the actual loss that would accrue by the reduction of the extra halfpenny. I agree with Deputy Lemass when he said that a mistake was made in the mathematical calculation there, because I believe that there would be such an increase in the number of letters posted owing to the reduction of the cost from 2d. to 1½d. that the loss would be more than made up.

Now we still have the grievance, I think, about the 6d. that has to be paid on small parcels, and on books that come through the parcel post. It is not the ordinary post but parcel post. I think that is one of the things now that causes me, perhaps, to use some of the bad language I used to vent upon the operators at the Telephone Exchange sometimes.

I am not going into the figures of the Estimates. The figures approximately show a net decrease of £192,000, and, of course, that is a step in the right direction, but it is a small amount when one considers that the Post Office Estimate amounts to something like £2,300,000. A diminution or decrease in that amount by less than £200,000 is not a great deal. I agree with Deputy Lemass, also, that it is a great pity to make any reductions fall upon what I might call the working services. Of course, every man is a working man, but as far as the lesser paid officials are concerned I think it is a great pity that cuts should be made upon them without adequate cuts being made in all directions in the service. I would like to press upon the Parliamentary Secretary that these people with the small wages are less able to afford cuts than those, as Deputy Lemass said, with much larger salaries. I only wanted to say that the grievances I used to have have to a large extent been removed, and that so long as the Estimate is decreasing I would be prepared to vote for this Estimate. But I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to take into serious consideration the suggestions made by Deputy Lemass to reduce the letter rate to 1½d. That and the reduction to the old rate in the cost of telegrams would probably result in a larger financial gain than the Parliamentary Secretary has any hope of.

Mr. Cassidy

I desire to direct the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to a number of grievances under which the staff of the Post Office are labouring at the present time. In doing so I would like first to focus attention on the question of the necessity for rebuilding the Sorting Office of the G.P.O. in Dublin. As is well known, Dublin is the chief forwarding and distributing office in the Free State, and that being so one would naturally come to the conclusion that it should be the largest and most important office in the country.

Instead of that we find that as far as Dublin City is concerned the chief sorting office is housed in a disused distillery in Pearse Street. As far as accommodation for the staff is concerned, in Pearse Street it is utterly inadequate and insanitary. I understand that the staff have been working in this insanitary building in very congested circumstances for upwards of four years. I understand that this question has been brought to the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary, and the reply given is that the question is at present under consideration and that negotiations are going on with the Dublin Corporation in regard to the street widening proposal and that consequently the matter has been somewhat held up. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to expedite this matter so that the people will not have to carry on under the insanitary conditions in the old distillery which is supposed to be the sorting office.

Another matter to which I would like to draw attention is in connection with the Engineering Department. I understand that a number of labourers working at present in the country are under notice of dismissal. Some of them have been dismissed in Cork. As well as that, I understand that some of them are under notice in different parts of the country. Also, it is contemplated that a larger number will be dismissed in the near future. I would like to point out to the Parliamentary Secretary that they have given from five to seven years' service and that whilst these men are dismissed I understand that there is plenty of maintenance work at present held up upon which these men could be employed owing to the fact, as the Post Office allege, I understand, that they have not the necessary funds. While the Engineering Department have been putting forward the contention that they have not funds at present, it might be interesting to point out to the House that in this particular Department thousands of pounds can be spent on automatic telephones for which there is no public demand and on which the saving is only problematical. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to reconsider these matters with a view to retaining these men whom he is contemplating to dismiss on work which is absolutely necessary maintenance work.

Another very important matter to which I would call the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary is in connection with the new post office at Lifford. Lifford is just on the border of Co. Donegal, one hundred yards or so inside the Six Counties. I would like to point out to the House, and more especially to the Parliamentary Secretary, that when the Border was first established, as far as the postal services were concerned, they were in an absolute state of chaos. I think the Parliamentary Secretary will probably admit that. Up to a few weeks ago, in fact, the staff responsible for the postal arrangements, as far as Lifford was concerned, were working in a couple of railway carriages, not ordinary carriages as you know them on the Great Northern or the Great Southern Railways, but narrow-gauge carriages, belonging to the County Donegal Railway, in a very insanitary condition. Although the staff did that, have carried on as well as they could, and got things into proper working condition, I understand that as far as these men, who are working under trying conditions, are concerned, the Post Office contemplate doing away with their services and bringing into Lifford Post Office a number of established men to take their places. I would point out to the Parliamentary Secretary, as far as that staff in Lifford is concerned, that they have carried the Post Office Department through a very trying time. The Post Office were confronted with difficulties there that did not exist in any other part of the country. They have brought the Post Office to a proper state of efficiency, and I say it would be very ungrateful if these men were thrown on the scrap heap and others brought in. I think at least the vacancies should be held for those who carried on so manfully, and that they should be put on to the established staff.

Another matter to which Deputy Sir James Craig and Deputy Lemass referred is that of the minimum charges for telegrams. That peculiarly affects Donegal, being as it is a Border county. I would like to point out that, in my opinion, more especially within ten or twelve miles radius of the Border, the Post Office is losing money by this increase. For instance, during the fishing season in Buncrana, which is about ten miles from Derry City, it is usual for fishermen to send approximately one hundred telegrams per day. One hundred telegrams handed in at Buncrana at 1/6 per telegram would amount to £7 10s. Those fishermen, if they so desire—it shows the futility of partition in this country— could pay a messenger boy 1/- to travel to Derry City and hand in those telegrams. As a result of 1/- they could save £2 10s. They could get those telegrams sent for £5, and in any place in the Saorstát they would have to pay £7 10s. That is a question the Post Office should take into consideration.

References have been made, I think by Deputy Sir James Craig, to the abolition of the sixpenny tax as far as parcels are concerned. I want to say definitely and clearly that I am against that for the simple reason that I believe that if you abolish that, people in England, Scotland, Wales and the Six Counties are going to send small consignments to Dublin, Cork and elsewhere, and thus get over the question of the tariff. I believe that can be done easily if the sixpenny tax is removed, and I urge that it should not be removed.

There is another matter. I understand the Parliamentary Secretary, in the course of his remarks, stated that the number of letters received from other countries exceeded the number which we sent out, and he made mention of the fact that this particular matter was governed by an international convention, and there was no possibility of getting readjustment. He also made reference to the fact that at a conference to be held very soon in London by the Post Office, the Australian delegates are going to raise this question of readjustment—that the countries getting more letters than they are sending out should have some sort of readjustment. I think the delegation we send across to attend that convention should back up the Australian delegation in order to get readjustment. I believe there is a deficiency. We get in more letters than we send out, and I believe that is one of the reasons that there is a deficiency. Owing to the fact that we handle more, we are at a loss. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will look into those things, the matter of the G.P.O., the matter of Lifford Post Office and of the engineering staff.

Mr. Carney

There are only a couple of matters I want to refer to in connection with this Vote. One is the question of the cost of telegrams in the Free State. It is, to my mind, a retrograde step to have increased the amount for sending a telegram from 1/- to 1/6 for this reason, that far more business would be done if a telegram cost only 1/- than is done at present. To my mind, we would have a distinct increase in the revenue of the Post Office if it were brought back to 1/-. Deputy Cassidy has gone into the mathematics of the thing, and he is perfectly right as far as he has gone in the matter. He referred to Lifford Post Office. There is another matter in connection with Lifford that I would like to refer to. Lifford has been made the central Post Office for Donegal, I understand. Lifford ordinarily is a place in which it would not matter very much whethere a man was English-speaking or Irish-speaking, because there is no Irish spoken in it at all. Being the central office for Donegal, however, a lot of correspondence must pass through this office which is destined for areas which are Irish-speaking. On that account, the man who is responsible for the office in Lifford should have a competent knowledge of the Irish language. I understand—I may be wrong—that the gentleman in charge of the office there has not a competent knowledge of the Irish language, which means that some junior official in the office must do the work which that man should be competent to do. I have no objection to the gentleman himself. I do not know the man, but I have been informed, whether correctly or incorrectly, that he has not a knowledge of the Irish language.

I would like to point out to the Parliamentary Secretary that the County Council of Donegal recently refused to appoint a girl as a clerk who was competent in every branch of knowledge that she was required to have, except the Irish language, with the result that they made her go to school and pass a qualifying examination before they would give her the appointment. The same thing should apply to the man who has charge of Lifford Post Office, because a lot of correspondence from Government Departments and from people in Scotland and America comes in Gaelic and he should have a knowledge of the language. The Parliamentary Secretary should see to it that a man is appointed who has that knowledge. He need not penalise the man who is at present there. He can give him an equal appointment anywhere in the country, but there should be a man in that post office who is competent to carry on the duties that he should carry on in a place which is one of the Gaeltacht areas outlined on the map issued by the Government.

Mr. T. Murphy

I think Deputy Anthony has done a useful public service in drawing attention again to the type of economy that has been effected in the services of the Post Office. The figures given by the Parliamentary Secretary, indicating a very substantial saving, are interesting, but if the savings made under the different headings are of a similar kind to the saving that prompted Deputy Anthony to put down this motion, then their value is a doubtful quantity. Some members of the House who have been in touch with this matter already have got information with regard to the position that obtains in Cork at the moment. We have again an exemplification of the policy of throwing out of employment people who have nothing to look forward to as an alternative to that employment. I have here a list of people immediately affected by this proposal. In a great many cases they are the fathers of large and helpless families. When we consider that the basic wage of the people thrown out of employment, as a result of this change, is a very modest one, something like £2 or £2 10s. a week, and that above and beyond that, as has been stated, on very good authority, there is necessary work for such men, it is very hard to understand the reasons that prompted the decision. I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary what consideration he has given to the case that has been submitted on behalf of the men concerned, and whether he has any answer to the contention that the men concerned could be engaged on useful work at the moment. It seems rather an extraordinary policy that people of that kind are to be thrown out of work and compelled to look for unemployment insurance money or for outdoor relief, when their services could be utilised by the State department concerned. If that be the policy of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, and we have no reason to thing it is not, because we have a good many examples of it already. I do not know that there is any apology needed for moving that this matter be further considered. The fact that the telephone service that he is particularly interested in has been adjusted to suit the needs of Deputy Sir James Craig does not affect the position that has been indicated in this motion.

We are certainly dissatisfied, and very dissatisfied, not alone with this aspect of the postal service, but with the lack of facilities in many other cases. We have in different places reasonable demands for services. I know of some towns in West Cork where demands have been submitted to the Post Office for several months for reasonable postal deliveries during the day or for a second delivery, and though the feeling officially was in favour of that demand, and a very fair case was made for it, we have heard nothing about the demand since. I want to call attention to the demands that are being made and to the lack of postal facilities in many places. People in many parts of the country are not concerned with automatic telephones so much as with the ordinary postal needs. I suggest that this matter should be considered in the light of what the people need. I disagree with the view that has been expressed that this service should be regarded as a business proposition, and that we should look at it from the point of view of directors dealing with the particular affairs of their companies. I hold that these services should be looked on in the same light as other social services, and that the convenience and the needs of the people as a community should be considered rather than the amount of revenue to be derived under one heading or another from the particular Vote.

I want to stress again as strongly as I can my protest against the action of the Department in cutting down the number of labourers employed on the outdoor engineering section, and to ask that there should be some consideration given to the areas in the country that have pressed, without success up to the present, for facilities that they ought to be entitled to. I support Deputy Anthony's motion, and hope that we will have some revision, of the decision that has been taken in this matter with a view to continuing the employment of men who have considerable periods of service, who have large families to look after, and who are ready to perform useful work in the capacity in which they have been hitherto employed. It would be a very undesirable thing to put such men on the scrap heap or to compel them to become a charge on public funds.

Mr. Kennedy

A year ago on this Estimate I complained about the inefficiency of the telephone service in the rural areas. There has been no improvement since in that service. It is very evident that the instruments in use are obsolete. I pointed out that the hearing was very bad, and a Deputy indicated that it was due to atmospherics and that my complaint was due to the fact that I had not a receiving set.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is the Deputy now on the wireless?

Mr. Kennedy

On the telephones. It is evident, as I pointed out then, that the telephone apparatus in the rural areas is very bad and new installations would require to be put in. But apart from the actual apparatus, the system of telephones seems altogether wrong. Take, for instance, Mullingar and Delvin. They are ten statute miles apart. To get a telephone ring from Mullingar to Delvin the call has to go through Dublin, a distance of over 100 miles. Then there is a wait of half an hour or an hour before you get the call. One would get from Mullingar to Delvin and back in his car in that time. That not only applies to Delvin and Mullingar, but to Delvin and Castlepollard, and various other areas. I pointed out last year that to get a service from Meath to Westmeath, or from Louth to Westmeath, one has to go around through Dublin. A direct line of telephone would save expense and make the service efficient, which it is not at present. That is in reference to the telephone service.

In the debate last year, and I daresay in the debate to-day, reference was made to the impartiality of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in the giving of employment. There is no impartiality in this Department in the giving of employment. As Deputy Murphy pointed out, men with long years' service as auxiliary postmen are passed over when it comes to the case of placing an established postman. Men of no experience, but simply because they were in the National Army, are put over their heads. I had occasion to write to the Minister on this particular matter, with reference to a case in my constituency, and I got the following reply:

"With reference to your letter of the 10th January on behalf of (so-and-so), I am directed by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to express regret that there is no work available in this Department for which the particular individual could be considered. It may be explained that the officer in question was employed in the Delvin Post Office as a boy-messenger from 1920 to 1924, and that his services were dispensed with on account of the abolition of his post. No promise of further employment in this Department was at any time given to him. But up to 1928 it was found possible to provide him with intermittent work of a purely temporary nature in the absence of an ex-National Army candidate. Under the existing regulations, preference must be given to ex-National Army men for any temporary or part-time positions which arise in the Post Office, and as there is now a suitable ex-National Army soldier available in the the Delvin area, it is regretted there is very little prospect of this man being requisitioned in the future."

I also wrote about an auxiliary postman being established in the Glasson district, but the reply I got was that owing to certain Civil Service regulations a man who would be a messenger boy like this individual would get the post in preference simply because he was a member of the National Army. Not only that but when I took up the cases of these two men the Department of Posts and Telegraphs wrote to them very stiff letters threatening them with dismissal for airing their grievances through me and telling them they were not entitled to do any such thing. Now it is evident to us, from these cases, and others, that positions in the Post Office are absolutely reserved for ex-National Army men, whether they are fit for the positions or not. Men with long years' service as auxiliaries are passed over, and there is no impartiality whatsoever in the service. I will go further and say that the efficiency of the service is on this account impaired. There are men placed in positions in my area who simply because they were in the National Army were given them. Some of these men are hardly able to read. It is a well-known fact that in the rural areas in Westmeath men are employed as postmen who cannot deliver the letters on their route. They drop them into the wrong houses. Of impartiality there is none. I do not know whether the heads of the Post Office are Freemasons or Knights of Columbanus. It strikes me they are a kind of Ku Klux Klan.

Mr. Davin

I think that the figures which have been given the House this evening by the Parliamentary Secretary will serve a useful purpose, if not in the course of this discussion, at any rate for future reference. I want to draw the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to two of the four items in the Estimate, where there has been an increase in the figures for the coming year, and in which I consider there should be a reduction. We have been informed by the Parliamentary Secretary, in the statement read to the House this evening, that association with this International Conference has led to very satisfactory results. I asked the Parliamentary Secretary a supplementary question with regard to the number of representatives which this State sends to such Conferences and the expense incurred. I find in the reply which the Parliamentary Secretary gave to that question that decisions which are not unanimous are not operative. Therefore, we have it that if any dissension or difference of opinion is disclosed in these Conferences no result comes from the discussion. That is, in cases where there is a difference of opinion.

I cannot see why it is necessary for this State to send three representatives to any International Convention or Conference when we could be equally well represented by one. In the Estimate this year there is an increase of £305 under this sub-head. The Estimate this year is £1,205. Under the sub-head the details are given, and I am surprised to find that the subscriptions to the International and other conferences amount to £660. There is a decrease from the previous year, where the Estimate was £880. Strange to say, travelling expenses and subsistence allowances are £360 as against £10 in the previous year, and in the matter of incidental expenses there is set out £185 as against £10 in 1928-29.

I am quite prepared to accept the statement of the Parliamentary Secretary, who is also Chairman of the Economic Committee, that he is anxious to find items in the lists of the Estimates, including his own, where savings could in the national interest be effected. I am drawing his attention to this particular case, where I believe a saving could be effected without hurting anybody. I believe we could be represented by one individual at this Convention. I say so for this reason: I believe that an agenda is supplied to the Department of State or to the individuals who are going to the Convention. If the Department of State is supplied with the agenda, which will set out what is to be discussed at the Convention, the individual who will represent the Department can have consultations beforehand with technical advisers or heads of the Department, and he will be enabled to put the Free State Post Office point of view before the Convention. That will obviate the necessity of taking with him two individuals for excursion purposes. We are not in a position—and I can refer to the Parliamentary Secretary's own words— to increase our expenditure under a heading of this kind for the reasons I have given. If we send one in future as against three in the past, it means that the saving that would be effected would represent wages that could be paid to 14 provincial postmen. My contention is that what could be saved in this way would employ 14 provincial postmen. The Parliamentary Secretary seems to doubt my figures. I understand that the average wage paid to provincial postmen amounts to 22/- per week. That saving would almost accurately represent the yearly wage for 14 postmen.

Under the sub-head dealing with superannuation and other non-effective charges, I notice there is an increase for the coming year of £17,050. I wonder to what extent is the increase here concerned with the dissatisfaction which exists amongst old servants in regard to promotions? I happen to know a good many Post Office officials. Anybody in contact with them knows there is a great deal of discontent. Some of it has been given expression to in this House, particularly with reference to unfair promotions that have taken place. I suggest that the increase in the superannuation charges particularly affecting the Post Office is due to the fact that men with long and efficient service are being overlooked and preference is being given to people simply because they come from a particular county or a particular part of the country. I would like to know if there is to be any increase under that sub-head, and, if so, why?

I received two complaints within the last twelve months from constituents of mine. The complaints dealt with interference with letters coming through the post. In the two cases which came under my notice, the parties concerned could not be charged with, or suspected of, activities in connection with anti-State agitation; in other words, they are not, and their families are not, associated with any organisation. In one case letters were addressed to a young lady, and she had absolutely no connection with anti-State activities such as are going on at the moment. I made inquiries, and I have been informed that there is a high official in the office of the Minister for Justice charged with the power of serving notice upon the Post Office authorities to hold up letters addressed to certain people who may be suspected of anti-State activities. I want to know to what extent that power exists, and, further, when the power is exercised, what becomes of the letters handed to the Detective Department for the purpose of scrutinising the nature of the correspondence. I heard in a few cases that letters were allowed to lie in the Detective Department of the Ministry of Justice for a fortnight or three weeks. What is the responsibility of the Parliamentary Secretary or the heads of his Department in regard to letters of that kind? What is the arrangement where letters are found not to disclose matter relating to anti-State activities? I would like to know whether such letters are returned to the Post Office for delivery within a reasonable time and whether responsibility for failure to deliver them lies with the Minister for Justice or the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. It is a serious matter, and it affects the confidence of the citizens in the administration of the Post Office.

I agree with several Deputies who protested against the increase in the charge for the forwarding of telegrams. I think the Parliamentary Secretary's figures prove that the increase has not justified itself up to the present, at any rate. I prefer to look back to the time three or four years ago when the Parliamentary Secretary, led by the then leader of the Farmers' Party, advocated an inclusive charge for the forwarding and delivery of telegrams. It would be much more satisfactory if the increased charge would now be accepted for both the forwarding and the delivery of telegrams. It is very unfair—I do not want to repeat protests made here before—that citizens have to pay 1/6 for delivery as well as 1/6 for forwarding a telegram, especially in a case where the telegram is for the benefit of the sender and not the receiver. If the charge for sending telegrams is reconsidered—and I hope it will be—I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary, for reasons he gave to the House two or three years ago, will see how necessary it is to sanction whatever revision there may be in such charges which will for the future include delivery as well as forwarding.

The Parliamentary Secretary said there were 73 new telephone exchanges set up during the last financial year. What was the average cost for the installation of these telephones in whatever areas they were installed? I and other Deputies representing the same constituency made representations on at least two occasions to the Parliamentary Secretary's Department endeavouring to persuade him that telephones should be installed at certain places. We got a reply, without any figures being given in support of it, indicating that the installation of a telephone at such-and-such a place would not justify the expenditure involved. I would like to know the average cost for the installation of the 73 telephones referred to.

I want to protest against the policy of the Post Office authorities which requires postmen to report the existence of wireless aerials on their routes, and even attend court and give evidence in cases where wireless licence defaulters are prosecuted. I think it is a wrong practice and a bad policy to force the postmen, who are very poorly paid officials and most of whom are in temporary employment, to do the duty of what I think should be a police officer. Any person who has a wireless set and who has not paid the licence, which by the law he is obliged to pay, is guilty of an offence under the law, and that person should be dealt with by a police officer rather than by a postman. The postmen have to keep the people on their hands; they have to be friendly with the people, and it is very unfair, especially in the case of a temporary postman, to expect him to report on an individual to whom he delivers letters; an individual who may have powerful influence, and whose influence, if exercised behind the postman's back in the shape of an anonymous letter, may get the unfortunate man into trouble. It is really a police officer's duty, and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will arrange that officers of the law and not temporary postmen will be called upon to perform this obnoxious duty.

Mr. Briscoe

I would like to try and understand how it could be possible for Deputies to take the advice of the Parliamentary Secretary and judge this Vote, not as a Government Vote but as a report of a joint stock company. I imagine that if Deputies were shareholders in that joint stock company they would want to be suffering from psycho-pathological optimism to retain their shares in that company. First of all, the Parliamentary Secretary, who would probably be the managing director in that concern, tells us that he is creating a saving by making the deficit smaller. In other words, if you save one year as against another on the deficit you are doing well. The total deficit in the years to which the Parliamentary Secretary referred amounts to over £4,000,000, so that your company would want to be very strong financially to maintain its progress, particularly in view of the argument which the Parliamentary Secretary brings to bear on the question. On the one hand, he says that by imposing an extra sixpence on telegrams you reduce to a certain extent the traffic in telegrams and thereby reduce the loss which you had on the telegraph end and you transfer that traffic to the telephone department. He says at the same time that where you increase the telephone traffic you increase your loss and, instead of making your loss less, and instead of approaching at some time or other a profit in the telephone department by all the improvements you are making and all the facilities you are giving to people to take greater advantage of the service, you are thereby going to inflict on the ratepayers a greater deficit each year. These are the arguments of the Parliamentary Secretary.

Take telephones, for instance. The telephone installations are evidently of a very huge nature from a capital point of view. If we examine items M (1) and M (2) in the Estimate for the years which the Parliamentary Secretary took into review when introducing this Vote, we find that while we took over debts in the shape of annuities on debt created under the Act of 1921 a certain amount had to be reduced each year, and you find that in 1926-27 the annuity in that particular item amounted to £42,000. In 1927-28 it was reduced to £40,000, in 1928-29 it was reduced to £38,000 and now it is down to £34,000, roughly at the rate of £3,000 a year. Now, take the capital account in respect of debt created under the Act of 1922. In 1926-27 the amount of the annuity was £25,000, in 1927-28 £42,000, in 1928-29 £58,000 and now it is £71,000. Add to that the superannuation item, about which Deputy Davin spoke, and you find that in the telephone department, while everyone is anxious to have it increased from the point of view of utility, there must be something wrong if the arguments of the Parliamentary Secretary are correct.

The only way that we can judge it is as a utility service and not as a joint stock company, which, no doubt, would only run such services as would prove to be a paying proposition. If the Parliamentary Secretary looks up the report of the debate on the financial Motion, in regard to the increased cost of telegrams last year, he will see that I pointed out what would happen and, as a matter of fact, Deputy Cassidy to-day mentioned that it did happen. In areas around the Border people are crossing the Border and sending telegrams from the Six Counties, so that we are not only losing the extra sixpence, but also the cost of sending the telegram. Deputy Cassidy has illustrated that, and I am sure he is in a position to substantiate his statement. The Parliamentary Secretary should surely be in a position to find out if that is not the case. The Parliamentary Secretary gave figures, and the manner in which they were given, as Deputy Anthony pointed out, was confusing inasmuch as it was impossible to follow them. For instance, I was interested in a particular item, namely, newspaper deliveries. I understand that the system adopted by the distributors of newspapers is that they buy from the Post Office franked labels. They then bring the parcels to the railways and distribute them themselves. If the Parliamentary Secretary is taking credit to his Department for the distribution of newspapers so handled it would be better to clear the air in that respect.

Another matter to which I would draw his attention is the reception and distribution by the Post Office of parcels containing dutiable goods from outside the Saorstát to domestic trading concerns. What happens in that case is that many concerns order goods which come in by post and many of them get samples. If these come from foreign countries and happen to contain dutiable commodities the concern receives a notice from the Post Office stating that the parcel was opened and was found to contain dutiable goods and, as they were not declared, the concern was liable to a penalty and the goods could be confiscated. What should be done in that Department is what is done in all other countries where a parcel is suspected of containing dutiable goods and where no declaration was made on the outside. In that case the person or concern receiving the parcel should be notified that the parcel is there so that they could send a messenger or go in person to have the parcel opened. If the goods are dutiable the duty would then be paid, and if it is not paid the goods could be confiscated.

I think that the system here is a loose way for the State to handle consignments to individuals. They open parcels in the absence of the consignee. Where the Post Office authorities suspect dutiable goods, they should send for the consignee to attend in person or send a messenger, and have the parcel opened in his presence to see whether the goods are dutiable. The constant reception of these threatening notices by traders is a source of great irritation. The matter could be easily adjusted, and thus worry to a great number of traders could be saved. I have received numerous complaints in this respect. There was, for instance, a case in which an individual in America sent a present of a gold watch to his aged father. The old gentleman received a note from the Post Office stating that the parcel had been received, that it contained a dutiable commodity which was not declared as such, and that he was liable to be fined a certain penalty and also liable to lose the watch. That is stretching matters too far. It is true that year by year the gross deficit has been reduced. As I said before, if we were to take the Parliamentary Secretary at his word, and if we were to judge this Vote as we would a report of a joint stock company, the only way we could treat it would be, as Deputy Anthony wants, to refer it back for further consideration, because if we were to place confidence in it as a joint stock company as shareholders, we would require to be suffering from psycho-pathological optimism if we were to continue as shareholders in that particular concern.

Mr. Byrne

Would the Deputy tell us what psycho-pathological optimism is?

Mr. Flinn

If you like to look up an encyclopaedia you will find it.

Mr. Briscoe

It is a disease known as Heffernanania threatened by Corryitis.

Mr. Goulding

The Parliamentary Secretary made a brief reference to the amount collected by his Department on what is known as the cash-on-delivery system. I am afraid that that is a very doubtful asset to this country. He did not state what proportion, if any, was collected on behalf of Irish firms. It strikes me that we should not give any help to cross-Channel firms who advertise in papers circulating in this country, with the result that people are induced to send away for goods that they could very easily obtain at home. These goods in many cases may be of inferior quality to the native products. In my opinion the work of this particular branch is aiding the importation of goods to this country, and it would be no harm if it were discontinued.

Mr. Heffernan

Is the Deputy speaking about the sixpenny parcels tax?

Mr. Goulding

Yes.

Mr. Heffernan

Is the Deputy aware that the sixpenny tax is only imposed on goods entering this country from outside? It is not imposed on internal parcels.

Mr. Flinn

How could it be imposed on goods entering from inside?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Flinn should rise if he wants to ask a question.

Mr. Flinn

I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to explain how any goods could enter from inside?

Mr. Heffernan

That is a terminological inexactitude.

Mr. Flinn

No; stupidity.

Mr. Heffernan

Some other people show stupidity also.

Mr. Goulding

It would be no harm if the system were discontinued, because it is of no benefit to this country whatsoever. Complaints have been frequently made in this House with regard to the status of Waterford City Post Office. I understand it is placed in a grade which is not in keeping with the importance of the City of Waterford, and that towns which have not a population as large as Waterford have offices of a higher grade than Waterford City Office. The result is that officials of that office are paid a lower salary than those working in the offices of a higher grade. I understand attention has been frequently called to the matter. I am not sure whether it has been rectified within the past twelve months. If not, it would be well that the matter should be adjusted now.

Mr. Fahy

I intend to be very brief, as I have only a few questions to ask the Parliamentary Secretary. We are asked to view this Department as a business concern or as a joint stock company. I do not know that that would be possible, in view of the fact revealed by, I think, Deputy Davin, that correspondence is held up in the course of transmission through the Post Office if certain people are suspected of anti-State activities. I understand that last year the President said that this practice had been discontinued. Perhaps my memory deceives me. However, I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to state how many citizens are on that black list, who compiles the black list, what is the exact procedure when correspondence is so held up, or is there any time limit to the delay in the delivery of such letters? As regards inefficiency, it has been stated that owing to the method of selection of temporary postmen, letters are frequently delayed a day or more in the city. I know that when I lived in Dublin up to some months ago, I frequently got as many as five or six letters for people living two streets away delivered amongst my correspondence, and I had to act as postman in order to get them delivered that day. These letters were not addressed in Irish. Of course, I have had letters sent out from my office addressed in Irish which came back to the office because they were addressed in Irish. On the matter of telephonic communication, I have but an academic knowledge, and I should like an explanation from the Parliamentary Secretary as to what the system is. I do not ask a detailed statement, but how is there a saving, for instance, in 'phoning from Ballina to Sligo? These towns are only thirty miles apart, but one has to 'phone from Ballina to Mullingar and back to Sligo, a distance of 200 miles. Does the system follow the railways, or is there any great expenditure in sending the message around 200 miles when a line of 30 miles would be sufficient? That is just a point upon which I would like information, if the Parliamentary Secretary would give it.

Mr. Moore

I want to inquire from the Parliamentary Secretary what steps have been taken with regard to the Savings Bank to enable it to compete with the existing commercial banks. It appears that during recent years the ordinary commercial banks have made very strenuous efforts to capture the Post Office Savings business by providing thrift accounts. In that way they get a lot of money which would ordinarily go to the Post Office Savings Bank. So far as one can see, very little effort is being made by the Post Office Department to counter that movement. There is no need to stress the importance of an effort to counter it. It is notorious that there is room for a good deal of investment in certain Irish institutions— some of them semi-State institutions —the money for which is not forthcoming, and it seems to me that the Savings Bank might well be asked to provide a lot of that money. In answer to a question this week, the Minister for Finance said that of £6,000,000 invested in the British Post Office by Saorstát depositors, since the Saorstát came into existence something like £1,000,000 has been re-transferred, leaving about £5,000,000 in the hands of the British Post Office Savings Bank, upon which no more interest is given than would be given by the Saorstát Savings Bank. At a time when everybody is regretting the export of capital from the Saorstát it seems very regrettable that the Government cannot succeed in re-transferring that money from the British Post Office Savings Bank to the Saorstát one. The Committee on Agricultural Credit expressed great concern that all the savings bank money and Trustee savings bank money was going to England for use there, and they commented strongly on the loss that accrued to Ireland by that system.

It is surely a confession of failure on the part of the Saorstát that, in face of that report by a committee of people who would not, according even to the standards of the Saorstát, be regarded as extremely pro-Irish, the present Government has not been able to do anything effective to get back that money. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to say that further strong efforts will be exerted to get a return of that big sum of £5,000,000. I think that if postmasters and sub-postmasters throughout the country were made full use of, and if it was put up to them that they were expected to interview the various depositors— apparently the depositors are known, because the Minister for Finance this week stated that circulars had been distributed to them to the extent, I think, of a couple of million—and that they were expected to convince these depositors that it was important to get back that money, one might expect a better return than that a mere one-sixth of the money should be re-transferred in the course of some six or seven years. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to say that in Dublin and in Cork, where the bulk of the Savings Bank deposits come from, the Post Office officials are being encouraged to induce the investment of more money in the Savings Bank, and are being encouraged to counter the efforts of the other commercial banks to get hold of the money, because it would be much more valuable to the State if they could get that money than that it should go elsewhere.

To my mind post offices throughout the country could be made a great deal more use of in regard to collecting the savings of the people than has heretofore been done. I think that even without legislation, the Post Office might be used for the payment of rates, the payment of debts, the payment of land annuities the collection of accounts of various kinds, and such matters as the ordering of magazines and books, and so on, and I think it should be possible to devise a cheque system by which. in the larger towns at least, the Post Office could be made as useful to those of small means as the commercial banks are to those of larger means. At all events, there is admittedly a great need for getting more money for the purpose of the State. With the machinery there, which could certainly fulfil the need to a very large extent, it is extraordinary if the Post Office are prepared to say that they cannot go any further in that line.

Dr. Tubridy

I was very much surprised to hear Deputy Davin state that there was an official of the Department of Justice attached to the Post Office whose duty it was to supervise the receipt of letters for certain individuals in the country. Deputy Fahy mentioned that the President stated last year that this censorship of letters had ceased. As far as my recollection goes, the President did state that the censorship had ceased. I should, therefore, like the Parliamentary Secretary to refer to the matter and let us know the exact position. Deputy Davin stated that there was an officer whose duty consisted of the censorship of letters. I received a letter some four or five months ago addressed in my own name, with the name of my own post office and county on it, but, in addition, there happened to the name of an adjoining post office, which is quite near mine, and which was added by mistake. The post office officials in Galway, which is my constituency, know me very well, and in all the local post offices I am well known. I do not see, therefore, when there was a slight mistake made like that in the direction of a letter, any necessity why it should be opened. The letter had been opened when I received it. I reported the matter to the postmaster in Galway, and I believe he did his best to discover how it happened to be opened in the post, but he failed. That is a state of things that should not be allowed. In any case, where a letter is opened, the postmaster of the place to which the letter was sent, whether by mistake or otherwise, should be questioned, and the matter sifted in a more thorough manner than is at present done. I am given to understand that the post office to which this letter was sent is frequented by the Civic Guards. I should like to know whether the officer who is in charge of the censorship of letters can get in touch with local barracks, and whether letters can be opened in an off-hand way by Civic Guards who frequent the post office.

It has been suggested here that the charge for the delivery of telegrams should be paid by the persons sending them. That is a change which is very necessary. I know many cases in country districts where medical officers and others who receive a large number of telegrams have to pay up to £3 or £4 a month for the delivery of telegrams sent by people who evidently do not know that the delivery charges are so high. If those who send telegrams were charged directly at the post office where they are sent, it would be much easier for everybody.

As regards the installation of telephones, that matter is proceeding rather slowly in my county of Galway. I was wondering if the Parliamentary Secretary would allow the same privileges to medical men and those who require to use telephones at night as are allowed at present to the Civic Guard. If there is an urgent call in the country for a doctor at night it is sent through the Civic Guards, and I have found them always obliging. But it should not be left an open matter. It should not be left to them to take or receive messages as they will. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to see that medical officers and nurses' cottages, if they have telephone installations, should be connected at night through the exchanges in the same way as the Civic Guards.

I believe an order was issued before the last general election that people employed in the Post Office should not take part publicly in the elections. As far as Galway was concerned, this order was not carried out. I know in my own constituency, Connemara, a number of personating agents of the Cumann na nGaedheal candidate were postmasters, postmen and other postal officials. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to inquire into this matter, because if the order mentioned was issued, it was disobeyed in West Galway.

Mr. Maguire

I move to report Progress.

Progress ordered to be reported.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Progress reported. Committee to sit again to-morrow.