Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Apr 1962

Vol. 194 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 46—Posts and Telegraphs (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration".—
(Deputy Dillon.)

(South Tipperary): When we adjourned last night, I was dealing with the advertising aspect of television. Last night, I thought the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs was a reasonable man; to-day I am not so sure. I advert to a reluctance displayed by him to give information at Question Time to-day about the working of the television service. In a democratic assembly, it sounds very bad when a reasonable question put by a Deputy is bypassed and hedged off by a Minister saying that an Act of the Oireachtas absolves him from all these decisions and that one will have to apply directly to the Authority. The questions tabled here were not unreasonable and I deplore that development in the House.

I wish to advert briefly to one aspect of television which has not been touched upon already. We have had suggestions about the entertainment side of it, and about advertising and information, but I want to deal with the educational possibilities. I should like to urge on the Minister that he should, in co-operation with the Department of Education and the Department of Agriculture, mobilise this wonderful new medium for the advancement of education and commerce. As we approach the Common Market, if we are accepted in any form, it would seem that science and modern languages will be of tremendous importance. Up and down the country, the teaching of science in the small towns is an expensive business. It is costly to set up even a small laboratory. I believe that television could be a help in bringing home modern science to some of these smaller teaching centres.

Furthermore, as we all know, there is a scarcity of proficient speakers of French and German all over the country, and while we appreciate that the average person has merely learned these languages at school as we all did, those who have become even reasonably proficient in them were not ultimately the best type of people to teach them. Here we have a medium by which we could bring to all our national, secondary, and vocational schools the services of the best teachers in these languages.

When I was at school, geography was a dead and dry subject. Afterwards, when one sees geographical magazines, it becomes a live subject. Here again the Minister, in co-operation with the Department of Education, should have wonderful scope for making that an interesting subject for school children. Drama and plays, if synchronised with the school curriculum, could be made much more attractive to the pupils.

In the field of adult education, particularly as regards agriculture and farming, we could carry our farming advisory services to the firesides of thousands of farmers. Agricultural shows, competitions and farming demonstrations could all be made available to them in a fashion heretofore undreamt of.

To do all that, the Minister would need to co-operate with the Department of Education and the Department of Agriculture. Posts and Telegraphs is a Ministry about which we never hear very much. I do not say that in any derogatory sense, but the only Ministers for Posts and Telegraphs that I can recall are Mr. Michael Heffernan, who happened to come from Tipperary, and Mr. J.J. Walsh, because he brought up all the Corkmen to Dublin. Further than these, I cannot recall a single Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. It seems to me a caretaker Department. Here is a wonderful opportunity for the present Minister to secure for himself a niche in the hall of fame. He can break new ground and by seeking that co-operation with the other Departments in the educational field, I believe he will be doing tremendous work for our people. He has at his disposal this exciting new medium, auditory and visual, by which he can secure the educational and commercial advancement of our people. I ask him to give it every consideration.

The last Deputy suggested last night that he felt the Minister was a reasonable man, but I know better. He has not been long enough in this House to know that the question of reasonable men is something that should be forgotten, when it comes to dealing with individuals who are allegedly responsible for a Department. Many nice things have been said about this Minister in the last fortnight. It is time he got a rub of the other brush to bring him back to realities.

One of the worst day's work ever done by any Minister was carried out in this House today by the present occupant of the position of Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, and I would ask the leader of the Fine Gael Party and the leader of the Labour Party to examine the replies given by that Minister to a number of questions put here today in the name of Deputy Dr. Browne concerning television, because if the Minister gets away with the replies given here, Deputies—and I am including the members of the Fianna Fáil Party, for I am sure that they do not expect to be always on the Government side—have their right to inquire into the policy pursued by Telefís Éireann completely stymied as a result of the precedent set by the Minister in his replies here today.

No Deputy will be entitled as a result of his reply to Question No. 60 on today's Order Paper to get satisfaction in this House with regard to matters of grave public importance. The question asked by Deputy Dr. Browne today was:

To ask the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the total average time to date in each month since its inauguration which has been devoted by Telefís Éireann to (a) live programmes, (b) filmed programmes of home origin, (c) filmed programmes of British origin and (d) filmed programmes of American origin.

There was not a tremendous amount of statistics involved in that question.

It was a matter of discovering the policy in this particular new baby that has been adopted, but Telefís Éireann, utilising the Minister, have evaded their responsibility in the very first year of their existence.

They have, because the Minister refused to give the information to this House and suggested that the Deputy who asked the question should write to the Authority concerned. The Authority as far as Deputies are concerned is the Minister who comes in here and accepts responsibility and actually has the audacity to say that he will accept responsibility, and if there is criticism to be levelled, it is to be levelled at him. If he is to accept responsibility, then he must accept the responsibility of replying fully to a reasonable question.

The Deputy should read the Act.

I am not going to listen to any balderdash from the Minister about reading the Act which went through this House when Telefís Éireann was being established. When that Act was going through the House, men with commonsense understood that there would be no legal interpretation of its sections in so far as information was concerned that should be disclosed to this House. It is only in courts of law that you find barristers and judges actually defining Sections A, B and C and subsections (a), (b) and (c) of those sections so that on a point of law, a client may be found innocent or guilty. When it is a question of policy, that is no way for the Minister to treat this House, to refer Deputies to the Act and suggest this is a function of the Authority which has been set up.

What is the Minister doing in this House? Is he just a rubber stamp? If Telefís Éireann is a wonderful outfit, the Minister is ten feet tall and his Government the same, but if Telefís Éireann are found wanting in certain aspects of their policy, the Minister disclaims responsibility.

That is the usual practice.

We have too many Pontius Pilates in this House where matters such as this are concerned.

That expression should not be used. It must be withdrawn.

If you say so, Sir, but that does not stop me from thinking it. I feel very seriously about this matter but I have not had time to examine whether a motion calling on the Minister to examine the position would be the best way to deal with it but as a first suggestion, I would say all Parties of this House should combine at this stage to make sure that vital information is made available. I recollect that on this Vote last year it was only by the skin of our teeth that we got an opportunity of having Telefís Éireann even discussed. I was one of the Deputies who came in at the vital moment when a discussion on Telefís Éireann was being ruled out of order. The least Deputies are entitled to is to criticise, but surely they are also entitled to information on which they will be able to base strong criticisms of certain proposals or lines of policy being pursued by the Television Authority.

The Minister tells us to write to the Authority. If a Deputy wants information with regard to the amount of time being devoted to foreign films or to programmes that utilise home material, and he wants that information in the course of a debate in Dáil Éireann today, is he to take up his pen and write to the Authority? Is the Deputy not entitled to say to the Minister: "You get that information for me because I want it for the people." When Deputies ask questions in this House, it is not for their own information alone; they are asking questions on behalf of the people who are paying for Telefís Éireann. I understand the fee is £4 a year and if people are paying that to any anonymous group, the least they are entitled to know is the amount of time devoted to programmes which are foreign and the amount of time to programmes which are home produced. Is the Minister still going to stand on the line of argument that he has no responsibility for giving information of that sort to this House? I have not asked the Minister how much he is paying the door man in Telefís Éireann or what expenses Mr. Roth or these other people are getting for working there. I have not asked about the day to day expenditure. I am not even asking him how certain appointments are being made, but I will ask him that in connection with Radio Éireann in a minute.

If the Deputy read my opening remarks, he would find they are providing 20 hours per week of home produced programmes.

I am not interested in the Minister's opening statement. I am interested in a reply given to this House by the Minister. We have no guarantee that the Minister will be there next year. I know if Deputy X asks a question in 12 months' time on the same lines as Question No. 60 on today's Order Paper as to how much time was devoted to foreign programmes and home produced programmes, the reply will be: "The Minister has no function in this matter. The Deputy should write to the Authority." If that is questioned by the Deputy, he will be told: "I would refer the Deputy to the reply given 12 months ago in this House." Thus the precedent has been set. We saw a similar precedent set by a former Minister for the Gaeltacht when he decided that questions which would be asked in the House in English would be replied to in Irish. Because one question that was drafted in English was replied to in Irish, that precedent has been set since and every Minister who has followed that Minister for the Gaeltacht has been hamstrung by it.

The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs did a bad day's work for the public and for the rights of Deputies in this House when he said he had no function with regard to Telefís Éireann in relation to disclosure of information of this nature. Even his colleague, the Minister for Transport and Power— and he is about the hardest man to pin down in regard to his responsibilities because nobody in the world knows what his responsibilities are——

He does not know himself.

He does not know. That is quite true, but even at that we pinned him down a few times to the extent that he said: "I will find out if I can", and to give him his due, he gave the information in this House in so far as it was available or in so far as it was possible for his officials to obtain it from the particular State body or semi-State body. I want to see that established in this House. I am not looking for it personally. It is the right of every Deputy that information of this nature should be disclosed through the House and the Minister is not doing himself or the House justice by giving the type of reply he gave here today.

With regard to Telefís Éireann, I postpone any comments I would make until I am familiar with it as a viewer, which I am not at the moment. However, I listen quite frequently to the other outfit, Radio Éireann, and all I can say is that I am very grateful there are so many other stations, so that I can get long wave stations and hundreds of stations on the medium wave just by twisting the knob. Therefore, when a licence fee is paid by a member of the public, he has a good choice. I hope that choice will be available also at the television end of the service.

The Minister will, I presume, tell me that he has no function in regard to the system of appointment in Radio Éireann. There is in American politics what is known as the pork barrel, and I understand that American Senators are always very anxious to get an arm or two arms into this pork barrel, not alone up as far as their elbows but as far as their shoulders. I believe we have a similar little pork barrel here in Ireland in Radio Éireann. It is a mystery to me how the various appointments are made. Of course we are told about the appointment of announcers but I am not concerned with the announcers. I am concerned with the people who work in the background, with the people who invite their pals to come along and give a show. It is like the old story: they bring their friends and their friends' friends too.

I do not know what the qualifications of many of the people are who get quite substantial fees in Radio Éireann for various programmes. The same voices, the same type of programmes are on regularly. It would appear that a change of a substantial kind is the last thing any of these people would consider. There is the position that Mr. X is appointed to a certain post in Radio Éireann. What do we find? It is like Parkinson's Law: within a very short space of time, Mr. X has his friends Y and Z in to help.

Of my own knowledge, I do not know of any interviews held, unless they are held by Mr. X when he interviews his own friends for particular posts or in relation to particular matters for broadcasting. It may be said that it is a very difficult thing to have proper supervision in a body of this kind because one is dealing to a great extent with artists, but I am not referring specifically to artists. I am not referring to variety programmes, to singers, or such persons. I am referring, in the main, to those people who take part in discussions and talks, and who give lectures of various kinds on Radio Éireann. I think there should be a great deal more examination into the qualifications of these people and into the basis on which, as I have said, Mr. X can pick Mr. Y and Mr. Z to take part in certain programmes.

I find it very difficult to deal with this matter here because I do not want to mention names. However, commenting on the matter here may have the desired result. The Minister should enquire himself in the hope that—I know he will say he has no responsibility — the position will be rectified; very often the fact that a matter is aired in this House has the necessary warning effect in the proper quarters.

Leaving that aside for the moment. I mentioned discussions, lectures and debates that take place on Radio Éireann. I should like to say that, as a result of discussions I have had with members of the public, the public generally are not a bit impressed by many of the discussions that take place. In many of them, there is an air of artificiality. In addition to that, there is no "bite", if I may use that word, in the discussions themselves. There is no real controversy. If ever there is a danger of controversy, a danger of a good brisk argument developing, the whole thing is smoothed over. It is a most insipid performance. I do not think the public are so delicate that they cannot take a lively argument on the air. They listen in to other programmes on different foreign stations. On those, we find most thought-provoking discussions taking place regularly.

The discussions on Radio Éireann are to a great extent one-sided or, if they are not one-sided, the protagonists on the other side have no standing of any description, no responsibility to the public in many cases and, therefore, as far as carrying weight is concerned, or putting a bit of life into the discussion, it just is not there. In mentioning this, I have in mind in particular those occasions when politicians are on the radio. If there is to be a discussion with members of political Parties, then it should be a discussion between members of political Parties, holding different political views. Anybody who can be described as non-political should not be put into the arena as an alleged representative of another point of view. Time and time again, that has happened on Radio Éireann.

The Minister, I am sure, will tell me that he has no responsibility for the programme. Let me put this to him: I insist that in programmes which should be conducted in a neutral fashion, in which there should be no such thing as a decision weighted on one side before ever the discussion takes place, the debate should be completely open and completely free. Such debates are very rare, in my opinion, on Radio Éireann. The fault can be laid to a great extent at the feet of the people who are in that body. Some of them are the most conservative people under the sun; some of them have a very Tory outlook. But we must also take into consideration that in that body, as in every other key body in the State, we have people who can only be described as holding very strong communist views. Indeed, I believe that in a body such as the body that controls Radio Éireann, and other State bodies, there are communists.

These are the very people who, in planning programmes, always ensure that the Government Party gets the most favourable treatment. The mentality of these people is that they are not anxious to have a socialist point of view or a Left Wing point of view. They want the two extremes. They want the Government side put, so that, if anything happens in this country, anarchy will result and the viewpoint they expressed will take over, but not, I may say, in a democratic fashion. The Minister has these two elements in Radio Éireann. I am sure others will be able to talk about Telefís Éireann.

These people are doing the Minister no service. It may be all right for him to suggest he has no responsibility, but, if he has no responsibility, then he is giving a very free run to people who will ultimately misuse him. If there is one thing we should have in a democratic state, it is a fair opportunity for all sections of the public to put their views on the radio and on television. As far as Radio Éireann is concerned, I am quite sure the dice is loaded. I do not suppose what I have said will worry the Minister very much but, at least, I have mentioned it.

The third point I want to deal with is the provision of telephones. There is a long delay in the provision of telephones. I hope that the Minister will, so far as he can, give priority in the provision of telephones to the rural areas. There is no doubt in the world that strong pressure will be brought to bear by businessmen, company directors, people with little offices stuck in a hole in the wall, to see that their businesses get priority. While I have the utmost sympathy with anybody who has an application in for a telephone, in the circumstances I think the Minister should give priority to the rural areas.

There it is not just a matter of a social amenity. Very often in the city, a matter can be dealt with by a little exercise, a little walk, apart altogether from the threepenny stamp. Very often a little exercise might be good for these people. A little walk into the next street might be much more beneficial than using a telephone to communicate with another businessman. In rural areas, where the farming community now need such a service, delays in installation are much too long to be excused. I have had to approach the Minister's Department on a number of occasions about the provision of telephones. Like all Deputies, I was received with the utmost courtesy and my wrath was turned away. I could not criticise the Minister or his officials because of the way I was met. At the same time, the phones did not materialise in the cases about which I made representation.

I would urge on the Minister that wherever possible priority should be given to people in the rural areas providing a service to the community. I give as an example the case of a constituent of mine who is a garage proprietor. He serves practically an entire parish so far as the repair and maintenance of tractors are concerned. He has to go nearly three-quarters of a mile to the nearest post office to make his calls, and at times there are delays of half an hour in making a call to a place 15 miles away. It means he has to leave his business, go to the post office and wait, perhaps, an hour or an hour and a half to do his business. That man is providing a first-class service for the farmers in the area. His application for a phone is now in at least 15 months. In the circumstances, the Minister will agree with me that 15 months is the maximum any man in his position should have to wait.

I know the arguments that have been put forward about overloading and so forth. However, I do not think that applies in any rural area. Another difficulty put forward is the great damage which was done by last winter's storms. The gangs were said to be fully occupied repairing storm damage and were now only resuming installation work at the stage they had reached last October. I should like the Minister to let us know if the question of overloading is involved, so far as the rural areas are concerned. I hope that these gangs, which are doing excellent work, will be put to dealing with applications of the nature I have mentioned.

I wish to compliment the Minister and his Department on, as it were, another good year's trading. This is the fifth year in which a surplus in their accounts has been shown. I would hope to see that favourable trend continuing in the case of a service such as this, for which the public has to pay. In many ways this has been a difficult year for the Minister. He was faced with the organisation and introduction of Telefís Éireann, and the Minister is to be complimented on his achievements in that regard.

The Estimate for the Department has increased by over £1 million, but the largest portion of this is accounted for by salaries, wages and allowances. While one can appreciate the ever-increasing demands by workers for increased wages to maintain their standard of living, I would have liked to have heard from the Minister there was some co-operation from his staff to give greater efficiency and output. These year-by-year requests for increased wages ultimately lead to increased costs unless there is coupled with them greater efficiency and greater output. The Department is like any other industry. It has to work efficiently, and I should have liked to have heard from the Minister the results of the introduction of efficiency experts, who were brought into the Department to improve its working. All the staffs of the post office are deserving of the highest commendation.

Like other Deputies I am inundated with requests from people to help them get telephones. The Minister in his speech estimated the waiting list at something around 10,000. The number of telephones installed last year was about 14,000. One can see this demand gathering momentum like a snowball running down hill. I would ask the Minister to take into account the progress the country is making and the increase in our living standards. One has only to go through the country to see the number of people who have motor cars, radios and televisions to know that the next step will be telephones. They will all want telephones, whether as an amenity or as a status symbol.

There are something like 145,000 telephone subscribers today, and it is a fair estimate that that number will be doubled within the next five to seven years. The Department will have to provide for expansion to enable an extra 20,000 telephones to be installed each year. That will tax the telephone service very heavily. I would ask the Minister to put that point of view before his staff. In the meantime I would advocate the sharing of lines in cases where people are held up and the introduction of any other emergency measures necessary until such time as trunk lines are available for all.

In many small villages throughout the country, particularly in my constituency in the towns of Tubbercurry and Collooney, there is a great need for an all-night telephone service. In the two towns I mentioned, we would even dare talk about connection with the automatic service. A number of foreign visitors now come to that part of the country and it is undesirable that there should be such considerable delays in getting telephone calls through. I would accordingly urge the Minister to extend the automatic service to that area. I have seen in his statement his planned programme for the extension of the automatic telephone and I should be glad if he would consider other areas as well from time to time.

Telephone staffs in general are courteous and helpful but a considerable lot of time is wasted occasionally. I would point to the telephonists we have in the House. One never has to repeat a number; he is connected immediately he gives his number, but in areas in the country, one has to repeat the number not once but several times. This is undesirable and causes many delays.

In implementing his plan for the extension of the automatic telephone, the Minister will need a lot of money. Despite that, I would ask him to press his plan ahead. I think he will have no difficulty in getting whatever money he needs to help him provide a better and a more up-to-date service. Some progress has been made in the past few years but we are behind the times. Anyone who visits other countries immediately notices the difference. We are at least 50 years behind in this matter and it needs to be looked into very seriously.

Moving to the postal services, they are generally quite satisfactory and cause very few complaints. In some rural areas, however, the morning mail delivery is very late. While I know the Department are at all times conscious of the necessity for early mail deliveries, I should like an examination in the near future to see if there could be an improvement. In my own area the mail is not delivered before 11.30 in the morning. This is far too late and I would ask the Minister to aim at a time of day beyond which postmen would not go.

A case was made by Deputy P. O'Donnell for the use of motor scooters by postmen. I have no doubt it is an up and coming thing but I do not think it would work out economically at the moment, unless we had a system like that in America—household postboxes erected at the gates. At the moment postmen would have to take their scooters anything from 50 yards to a quarter of a mile through boreens and pathways and I do not think that would be an economic proposition. Deputy Norton suggested that the type of uniform being issued to postmen should be improved. I agree and suggest that a hardwearing material could be provided. It is a matter I would commend to the Minister very strongly.

During the year, we had the opening of Telefís Éireann and on this achievement alone the Minister deserves the highest commendation of the House. Telefís Éireann, though as yet in its infancy, has been giving an excellent service. I have heard very few complaints about the programmes and very little about the variety of programmes. By and large, I think the mix is fairly good and if I asked the Minister to press for a change, it would be that he would consider seriously the more widespread utilisation of this medium, considering the impact it has on the entire country.

The farming programmes are very good and very well presented but I think the service should be expanded so as to encourage progress in the industrial field. We must let our people know what is going on in other parts of the country and the best way of doing this is to provide programmes around the many big companies established in the country—the E.S.B., Bord na Móna and so forth—and even come down to the small ones. We could couple with such programmes the means by which local communities can avail of Government help to get their own industries going.

In parts of the country, there is a great necessity for initiative among small communities, but if we could use this medium of television to educate our people on the lines I have mentioned, we would be helping them to give to this nation the impetus it needs to carry forward its industrial and agricultural expansion so that we can provide the answer to the neverending demand for an increased standard of living. It can also be usefully and profitably utilised in connection with other projects in small towns throughout the country to foster ideas under Bord Fáilte. Television has tremendous potentials in this respect— to show to people who are fainthearted and who lack imagination what can be done and is being done in other parts of the country.

Equally important is the impact television can have on the Irish language revival. The small Irish content in the programmes at the moment is understandable but I do not think there are many complaints about it. I should, however, recommend to the Minister that serious consideration be given in the near future to the Irish language question, to the provision of further Irish programmes particularly during children's hours of viewing and suggest that these programmes be couched in very simple language. We do not want language with a blas but rather the language children learn up to the age of 15 years. In this way, the bulk of our listeners will understand what is being said, and it will take the shyness and the inferiority complex out of our people and they will start to use again the simple words they know so well.

The Minister should have regard to public opinion with regard to programmes on Telefís Éireann and he should give the people what they want. I would advocate that he should have opinion polls taken at regular intervals throughout the country. This House is not the best medium in which to set down programmes for the ordinary people because wherever politics is involved, there will be an attempt by one side or the other to slant the matter towards their own political achievements. I would refer any alterations in the programmes to a poll of public opinion.

Deputy P. O'Donnell and other speakers referred to the position of the subpostmasters. I must say that if one looks at the thing without examining it closely, one comes to the conclusion that they are very poorly paid. Deputy O'Donnell recommended that their secondary sidelines should not be taken into consideration and that they should be appointed as subpostmasters and subpostmistresses purely and simply. In this respect, I would hold with Deputy O'Donnell but only in so far that we should take out their sidelines and appoint them as subpostmasters with proper rates and that we should prohibit them from associating themselves with any other business. If we did not do that, as soon as they were appointed, they would be opening grocery shops or public houses near the post office so that the pension money could be spent there.

One sympathises with these people but when there is a post office vacant one wonders how sincere they are or is it worth their while to chase one around the country so that they may get a recommendation to get this simple post at £100 or £120 a year.

We had a Minister for Posts and Telegraphs here for 16 years and you had to belong to the religion before you could get the job.

Some remarks were made about the increase in the postage charges. Deputy O'Donnell made the case that the Department should find some other way of paying for itself than increasing these charges. Then he went on to cite the case of the farmer living in an out of the way place who receives only an isolated letter. The main portion of this increase in postal charges will fall on the business community and in that way the small increase that it will involve to the rural community is insignificant. Apparently Deputy O'Donnell did not examine the matter very fully.

In the case of the telephone service, the rental is being increased by 30/- a year. I think this is right because the public are paying for a service. I would recommend to the Minister that he should encourage people to use more telephones and to provide them with a better service. Deputy Ryan remarked that the public were getting lazy and that it would be better if there were fewer telephones. I would suggest that people should be encouraged to get a series of lines so that when one is engaged they can be got on another. One thing is certain and that is that you will not drive the people of this country backwards. If they want telephones, they will have them and if they want to speak on their telephones for an hour they will do so. The telephone department sells a service to the country and it should be more efficient, more economic and more serviceable to the community.

I did not intend to intervene at all on this Estimate but I have been moved to do so by the surprise the Minister gave me this afternoon. He is usually very courteous and obliging at Question Time and I was shocked by his answer to Question No. 60 on the Order Paper today. Deputy Dr. Browne asked for the total average time which has been devoted by Telefís Éireann to live programmes, to film programmes of home production, to film programmes of British origin and to film programmes of American origin. That was a question that should have been answered. I suggest to the Minister that he should answer it when he is replying to this debate.

It is important that we should ask questions from the Ministers who purport to be in charge of the various State Departments even though some of these bodies have a certain amount of autonomy. I consider that it is through the Minister that Deputies should ask for official information concerning his Department and that such information should be given fully. That is one of the greatest rights we have in this Parliament and it is a right that should not be snatched away from us. The Minister for Transport and Power has been getting away with murder in this respect but he has been in on the Adjournment on several occasions recently and I think he is coming to his senses. I should not like to see this Minister being given the same treatment because I am sure that, on consideration, he will give this answer.

I have read many of the speeches made in the debate. The Minister received many compliments. I have to compliment him on many things but I have also a few bones to pick. I heard one of my colleagues, Deputy Hogan, say that the Minister would earn a niche for himself if he did something about television. I am sure this Minister is not looking for any niche but is quite satisfied to do his job and is doing it to the best of his ability. I have found him to be a very courteous man and I know he will accept what I am about to say as not being said in any carping spirit but as reasonable criticism.

I shall start off on the subject of efficiency in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. We have had streamlining and efficiency here and there and the cutting down of services. I posted a letter in Waterford before 3 o'clock last Monday and it did not arrive in Dublin until this morning. It would have been faster by runner. I remember when a letter posted before 7 p.m. in South Wales, Bristol or Reading would be delivered in Waterford, Wexford, Clonmel or Dungarvan before 12 o'clock the following day. In the efficiency of 1962 that is not the case. The entire mail service has been streamlined to such an extent that the mail is flown into Dublin and the services of the mail boats from Rosslare to Fishguard, Fishguard to Rosslare, Fishguard to Waterford have been cut off. So much for letters.

We come now to Telefís Éireann. Telefís Éireann has goodwill and it is important that it should keep that goodwill in the country and in this House but the fact that if Deputies ask the Minister for information regarding Telefís Éireann and that information is refused and the Minister says that the Deputy should write to the Authority or the Director will not create goodwill. A Deputy is entitled to get information and to have it in this House and to have it on the record of the House.

I have referred to the length of time it takes for a letter to travel from Waterford to Dublin. In regard to the reporting of news on Radio Éireann, especially from Waterford, there is a time lag of 48 hours. One important item of news that came over 48 hours later was worded in the same way as it was given in the local Waterford newspapers and the national newspapers and I wondered had Radio Éireann not bothered about it or had no correspondent and had just sent out somebody to buy a paper to see what was happening.

About two years ago I had to ask the Minister a question because there was a news item broadcast from Radio Éireann regarding catches at various fishing ports. I wrote to Radio Éireann asking them to let me have a copy of the newscript and they wrote back to say that it would not be made available. I asked the Minister for it and he told me——

To write to Radio Éireann for it?

I had written already. The Minister did not tell me that because he knew I had done so. I told the Minister then that I had occasion to write to a fellow countryman in Belfast for a copy of a news broacast and that I got it. It is a strange thing that Deputies in this House could not get such a thing. I was asking for the script because Radio Éireann by its conduct showed that it was not sure of itself and what it had done. I will make myself clearer. Radio Éireann made a broadcast on, I think, 8th December, 1960, on the 1 o'clock news, as to some wonderful catch of about 700 cran of herring in Killybegs and about 200 cran in some other place in our portion of Ulster. They concluded the broadcast by saying that there were also very good catches at Dunmore East. That was repeated on the 7 o'clock news. That is what I wanted to ask the Minister about because 7,000 cran of herring had been landed at Dunmore East that day, more than had been caught in all the ports in Ireland for a month before that, and it was not worth while reporting from Radio Éireann.

To show that Radio Éireann knew they had put their foot in it, they had a man in Dunmore the following Thursday. He interviewed a few people there and there was a broadcast of his interview the following Sunday. As the Minister knows, I listen to Radio Éireann consistently. From memory, the broadcast described how busy this place was, the babel of tongues, and all the buyers from various countries—foreigners, and so on. Then the person broadcasting spoke about the local buyers and "hangers on". That was a dreadful thing to have broadcast from a national broadcasting system. We were short of many of these "hangers on" in some of the ports this year and the fish could not be sold. These are all reputable and decent people and the more of them that come to the ports to buy fish the better. They should not be insulted on the national radio. When a Deputy comes into this House and endeavours to get information about it, he should get more help from the Minister.

As far as telephones are concerned, I am afraid to say anything. I have received great courtesy from the Department and the Minister and the officers of the Department have helped me in many ways. I know there are great demands on the service and I will be reasonable. I know from experience that the engineers work as hard as they possibly can and try to instal telephones but when they have left an area it is impossible to get them back quickly to that area. I have not a great deal to say about that, but what I have to talk about are the telephone accounts. Would it be embarrassing the Minister to ask him is the Department of Posts and Telegraphs sure of the accuracy of their accounts?

Generally speaking, yes.

A case was brought before me which shook me. The account was for a very big amount of money for two months. The subscriber discovered on making inquiries that there was a telephone call charged to her to an island in the Mediterranean.

I do not try to throw cold water on the Government Department. I said somebody might have used the telephone and she replied that she did not think it could happen. Suppose a person in Waterford wants to telephone to somebody in an island in the Mediterranean. When the operator asked for their number is it possible that they could give my telephone number, for example, and that I would be charged for it? If that can happen it is as well to say so because people can then take as many precautions as possible in relation to their telephones.

I do not think it is right that there should be an arrangement with the Accounting Section of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs that the telephone should be cut off. If there is a dispute about charges, it is not right that the subscriber should be cut off. I do not believe there is anything in this world infallible except one person and I shall not bring that matter into this debate.

I think it was Deputy Gallagher who mentioned that more time should be given to the language so as to encourage people to use more phrases in Irish. I do not know where people like myself or the Minister stand as far as the language is concerned because disciples of the Irish language resent people like me. I was pulled up at a debate some time ago, because I used portion of a Christmas greeting in Irish, by one of the disciples of the revival. I do not know whether an increase in the number of television hours devoted to the language will make people love or speak the language.

When I was speaking on this Estimate last year I was interrupted by Deputy Corish. He gave me the proper expression in this matter. I was talking about the manner in which traditional singers sing. I was saying that they are not able to hold an audience and that when the people hear them on the radio they say "Turn that off". Deputy Corish interrupted me and said: "They do not. They say `Turn that thing off' "— and that is right.

We have changed "Today in the Dáil" to 10.30 p.m. because nobody used to listen to that programme for a long time. At 10.30 p.m., when the news of the day was over and when the majority of the people in Ireland were tuned in to Radio Éireann, the traditional singers came on the air and everybody switched to another programme. At 10.45 p.m., the programme "Today in the Dáil" was broadcast but nobody bothered turning back from Radio Luxembourg or whatever other station they had gone to in the meantime. The Minister has caught up with that because "Today in the Dáil" is now a continuation of the news. From what I am told, many more people listen to that programme now.

I have seen a great deal of the telecasts from Telefís Éireann. They are excellently produced. I read in the papers every day of drama festivals and musical shows all over the country. That is good. Even in very small towns there are groups of people who come together and put on magnificent and ambitious musical shows. I do not know if I have any right to say this here and whether all we can do is to vote the money and let the boys off, but it would be no harm if the Minister told them to go down the country and visit some of these places. It would be well if they gave short broadcasts from them or gave short broadcasts of portions of musical comedies, light opera or opera from various parts of the country. I think a regular programme could be made out of that. Now I come to the political implications of Telefís Éireann.

And the Common Market.

The Common Market is right. A lot of people say we must keep politics out of Telefís Éireann. I do not know how in the name of God we can do so because nearly everyone in it is a political appointment.

Let us say we hope they all have some politics, anyhow.

I do; I hope so.

That is a good thing.

I suppose I should say that I do not know what their politics are but that I should not like to see them coming through on the screen. I support the statement by the Leader of my Party, Deputy Dillon, as regards the presentation of the programme with the Taoiseach, Deputy Corish and himself. I am sure the Minister saw it. The Taoiseach was shown against a background of Europe but the Leaders of the other two Parties were shown as if the programme were just a casual talk. Whenever an important event like that occurs and the Leaders of Parties are called together, the whole telecast should be done from the one room.

I want to close by saying what many Deputies have said but I am sure the Minister is not tired of hearing it. It concerns auxiliary postmen. When I think of the mileage these poor devils must walk for the small money they draw, up the boreens and across the fields in all kinds of weather, I realise how hard life is for them. Now there is talk about putting them on scooters. I have often seen these poor fellows on the road drenched to the skin but the letters were delivered and delivered on time. Their case must be considered. We have considered the cases of a whole lot of people. We have given raises in pay to people and we have given better conditions to people. It is dreadful to throw these auxiliary postmen out of a State service with no pension and no reward.

In the case of subpostmasters, it was stated here that if they were put on a better scale they should give up any other job they had. I do not agree with that because the subpostmaster is an adviser. He helps people, and he is a letter writer, in some cases, even though people are literate and if he does a little business, I see no harm in it. Although many people try to be appointed that does not indicate it is a very profitable job. The majority who seek these appointments have no job and try to be appointed in the hope that it would better their business and they always hope there may be more remuneration.

I am particularly concerned about auxiliary postmen and subpostmasters. Finally, as regards the subject matter of Question No. 60 it is important that the Minister should give that information which is information a Deputy is entitled to get, how many hours of programmes there are and the manner in which those programmes are graded. It was normal practice to give that information and I am sure the Minister will give it.

As usual, the Department has inserted a paragraph in the Minister's speech about the problem of poor reception of Athlone transmissions in certain parts of the country. It states that there have been discussions between technical officers of the Authority and his Department but that no solution was reached. Since I became a member of the House, we have had complaints on this Estimate each year from South West Cork Deputies about poor reception from Radio Éireann in the greater part of that constituency. We are told by whatever Minister is in office that attention is being given to the matter and every effort being made to remedy the position, but the following year, it is the same procedure again. They have done their best but there seems to be no solution.

Is this more difficult than the Berlin problem or the Middle East problem? This excuse is completely out of date. There is no justification for the Department ignoring the more remote parts of the country, peninsulas, islands and a good part of the mainland in South West Cork. The Minister should take definite steps to rectify these continuing complaints made through local authorities, public bodies and the Deputies representing that constituency. This question is of immense importance at present because, as Deputy McQuillan termed it, we have this "new outfit" in operation known as Telefís Éireann. Is television to be limited also? I fear that may be the case because the Minister has mentioned that these links are to be completed later this year and that it is hoped that by the middle of the year viewers in practically all parts of the country will be able to receive Telefís Éireann programmes. Why does the Minister say "practically all parts of the country"? Has he in mind that the television service will not cover the entire country? Will some places be ignored as they are by Radio Éireann? Shall we be told in years to come, if we live and remain members of this House, that every effort is being made to solve technical difficulties and to provide a proper television service for West Cork? I want a definite assurance from the Minister, when replying, that we will get reception and I want to warn him sternly that nothing short of a full service will satisfy us.

At present the Minister is getting £1 annually from the majority of West Cork people under false pretences because it is to Luxembourg or the BBC we should be sending the money. We are getting nothing from Radio Éireann in return for the fees we pay. I should like to have definite information from the Minister on what he is going to do about radio reception in the first place. Is he going to do what has been done by himself and his predecessors in the past—send down a few men with a van, let them call here and there to a few towns and villages, ask questions of people who make complaints and then return to Dublin and write back saying they are doing the best they possibly can?

The Minister goes a little further this year. He said in his statement that during the year the Authority gave priority to the establishment and extension of the television service. They were so busy with television that they could do nothing about poor radio reception in West Cork. The Minister should ensure that more "active measures" than those quoted in the Department's letters and in letters from Radio Éireann should be taken to rectify the position and to ensure that the entire country will be covered by the television service. We do not care whether it is piped to us or not, but we want it and we want a first class service. It was stated in this debate that in parts of the country reception is too good and they want to have the service jammed. We have the opposite case. We are being jammed for far too long. We want to remove the jam and get butter in West Cork.

It has been brought forcibly to my notice and the notice of my colleagues that there was great dissatisfaction with the recent Radio Éireann broadcast in regard to tourist development in Glengarriff. This House has been most liberal in giving funds for the development of the tourist industry, and we have many active organisations throughout the country spending money and energy on attracting visitors. As tourism is one of our main industries in West Cork, we have made and are making every possible effort in this direction. We are succeeding. I think there is no place in Ireland or on the Continent where people get better service, better value for money or better holidays than around the West Cork coast. One of these resorts, Glengarriff, is known internationally. Recently we had a broadcast from Radio Éireann commenting adversely on the facilities provided at Glengarriff. The Secretary of the Glengarriff Tourist Association, a lady named Marian P. Hughes, states that the Association feels that these comments are unjust, unfair and adverse publicity as these alleged complaints have not been investigated. That is one of the grievances of the local tourist association, that the complaints were not investigated.

Before a State-sponsored organisation such as Radio Éireann comments adversely on a noted tourist resort like Glengarriff, they should take some steps to ascertain whether the complaints were well-founded or not. They also feel that such adverse publicity should not be broadcast by Radio Éireann as it is damaging to the people who are mainly dependent for their livelihood on the tourist industry. "The association" the letter states, "will be grateful for your assistance in drawing the attention of the Minister to this matter." The Tourist Development Association in Glengarriff has sent letters to the three Deputies for the constituency asking them to bring this matter to the notice of the Minister and voice their strongest disapproval of the broadcast to which this letter refers.

I have no doubt that some endeavour will be made by Radio Éireann to offset whatever damage has been done to this resort by the adverse publicity which they gave it. They should be more watchful before criticising in this manner, without at least ascertaining what the facts are. The letter also states that the facilities afforded in Glengarriff are second to none. From my own experience, and I was in Glengarriff on Monday last, the facilities are first-class, as indeed they are in any tourist resort in the constituency of Cork South-West. I hope some steps will be taken to give satisfaction to these people in Glengarriff who rightly resent this adverse publicity given by Radio Éireann.

I do not wish to leave the question of Radio Éireann without asking the Minister to consider the advisability of widening his sports review broadcasts. I have made it clear on a number of occasions in this House that we should have more bowl-playing news from Radio Éireann. We have news about every other type of sport, billiards, tennis, golf, not to mention the G.A.A. news and the rugby and soccer news, and we have in portions of this country, and particularly in Cork County, many people who are bowl-playing enthusiasts and who have played big matches from time to time. I understand that approaches have been made to Radio Éireann, and I have made them here, that news of these matches should be broadcast but these representations have been ignored. I am asking the Minister now to review the position again. I cannot see any justifiable reason why news items on bowling matches should not be broadcast, just as news is broadcast about other numerous types of sport.

I hope the Minister will not forget my request this time. Probably if I directed a question to him later on in the House, he would tell me to write to the Director. In anticipation of that happening, I may write to him very soon again but I hope the representative from Radio Éireann who is here will also carry the view to the Director of Broadcasting. The number of people interested in bowl-playing matches is greater than the number interested in several of the other types of sports which are broadcast.

The previous speaker referred to auxiliary postmen and the desirability of introducing a superannuation scheme for them. I wholeheartedly agree with that view. I believe this scheme should have been in operation a long time ago. Auxiliary postmen are now one of the few sections in the public service without any pensionable rights, other than the old age pension which is open to all. Those men who are giving, and will give, I have no doubt, good service—some of them may be up to 50 years—should get some appreciation from the State by way of guaranteed pensions. It is usual to mention this annually on this Vote and seeing that the view is more or less representative of all sides, as members of all Parties have referred to this question, I hope some measures will be taken to implement it and that we will devise a pension scheme for auxiliary postmen in a somewhat similar way to the pension schemes devised for road workers and other groups of public workers.

Reference was also made to the subpostmasters. My view is that they are entitled to some increase in their remuneration, just as other groups of workers received increases lately. There should be some system of arbitration whereby these claims could be examined by an independent body and suitable recommendations made. Everybody appreciates that the cost of living is increasing from day to day and the subpostmasters are entitled to some increase in their allowances.

I was surprised to hear Deputy Gallagher from Sligo saying that an increase should be given only if they confine themselves to their actual employment as subpostmasters and that the right to have some sideline, namely, a shop, should be withdrawn from them. That is a most outrageous comment for any Deputy to make. I see no valid reason why postmasters should be denied the right to have a side-line such as a suitable grocery store, as most of them have. I think Deputies will agree that were it not for those little shops together with their post offices most of them would not be able to exist at all. There is no justification for Deputy Gallagher in making that suggestion and I have no doubt that the Minister will ignore it. I hope that in the not too distant future some scheme of conciliation and arbitration will be brought in so far as those people are concerned.

I am not going to follow Deputy Gallagher on the matter of people running after him about getting those appointments. That probably is true since appointments are made on a political basis, but when the inter-Party Government were in power and a member from our benches, Deputy Keyes, God be good to him, was Minister he endeavoured in a very big way to do away with the system of political appointments as far as subpostmasters are concerned. I understand that he set up machinery whereby power of appointing subpostmasters was given to an independent board. That board still exists but its power has been withdrawn, and as far as I know instead of submitting the name of the most suitable applicant now the board more or less has to submit the names of at least three.

At most three.

In any case, the Minister has still the same right to pick the man who is best qualified politically. That, of course, has been the system that has obtained in years gone by, but it is regrettable that when the late Deputy Keyes set a headline that headline was not followed by subsequent Ministers. It would be to the general advantage of the country and of the members of the House, particularly on the Government side, if such a system were established.

I have been asked by the residents of Cape Clear Island to make representations again to the Minister with a view to an extended telephone service for them. He will appreciate the position of the island people living nine miles from Baltimore and seven miles from Schull having a limited telephone service. They made representations to the Department with a view to getting the same service as obtained in Baltimore. I would ask the Minister that instead of the closing time being 7 o'clock he would extend it to at least 9 o'clock, which would be the same time as the service in operation at the head office in Baltimore post office.

Reverting to auxiliary postmen, an unfortunate incident, as I should describe it, happened in Cork South West during the past year in the removal of a postman with but little cause. It was the subject matter of a question of mine here in Dáil Éireann, and I thought that the Minister's action was, to say the least of it, very harsh. The man was a married man struggling in the extreme end of one of the peninsulas, who happened to give a few letters to children, a man against whom, as I understand it, there was no allegation made or implied that there was any fraudulent intent. Everything was above board and the people were quite satisfied, but because of events which probably are not uncommon in this country the Minister sacked him, giving as his only reason that one letter was alleged to have got lost. We do not know whether it did or not, or whether it ever came, but the one thing clear about it was that there was no question of dishonesty on the part of this man.

That is correct—no dishonesty, no fraud. I would not like anybody to think that he was dismissed for fraud.

There was no fraud or dishonesty. He just gave a few letters to children on their way home from school on an isolated occasion. I admit that he had been told by the postmaster, I think a few years prior to his dismissal, that he should not hand letters to children. I would ask the Minister if he could possibly reconsider that decision, which was exceptionally harsh. I am surprised at the Minister's attitude, because the Minister is rather a mild, easy-going type of man and one would associate that type of decision with some of his colleagues rather than with himself. Perhaps, it is no use pleading about this question, for possibly the Minister might be forced, once a man was suspended at all, to make it final on political grounds. We know that there were some other horses interested in the race from the Minister's Party and that probably made it difficult, once he suspended him, to give him back the post again in view of the endeavours made by some of his henchmen to catch on to the job.

There is another item I should like to mention here publicly, even though it might be deemed to be relatively small. The principle is a very big one. In Crookhaven, at the extreme end of the peninsula where I reside, we had a postmaster — a deliverer, as he was termed—for years. The remuneration attached to the post was not very much, but it was helpful to the residents in that district to have him as it is not a very economic district. Some 12 months ago or less, a young man was appointed. The post supplemented his other income by about 32/- or 35/- weekly. He was knocked out, the post was abolished and a man from Skibbereen, 29 or thirty miles away, was appointed to deliver the mails in Crookhaven. Surely that is not fair or just, in an area where we had so much unemployment and where every job and every bit of income counted? I am sure that the Minister would not agree that a man from Cork should come up here, deliver the mails in Dublin, and go back to Cork again. That would be on a par with what has happened in this case.

I am asking the Minister now to review this position and to give back that job to the local man who had it. The Department said that less than £2 weekly did not mean much to anyone but as far as those people are concerned every penny counts. I know because I was born there. The 32/- or 35/- weekly which this man had for delivering letters was helpful to him. I am protesting about the post being abolished and no local person having the opportunity of delivering letters in the locality. The man driving the mailcar from Skibbereen had his own job to do and the man in Crookhaven should have his job as well. We cannot sit down and allow these things to happen. Why should a man from Skibbereen do the postman's job thirty miles away from where he lives and sleeps? It is unfair and it is a bad principle. I must protest again and ask the Minister to reconsider the position.

I do not propose to deal with any other matters on this occasion. However, I should like to refer again to the main reason why I contributed to the debate, that is, to draw the Minister's attention to our poor radio reception in West Cork and more so to bring to his attention the fact that we demand a full service from Telefís Éireann from Cork West.

I think the Deputy went over this ground previously.

It is so important that it is worth repeating.

He is covering the blind spots.

The Minister has made these statements here that by the end of the year practically all parts of the country will be able to receive Telefís Éireann programmes. What I want to bring home to the Minister is that if the peninsulas and the islands in West Cork are going to be omitted from this service he can rest assured we shall take much sterner measures than we have taken in regard to the poor radio reception. However, I am hopeful the Minister will not allow that situation to arise, that he will not try to collect £4 licence fees under false pretences in West Cork in the same way as the Department is collecting them by way of radio licences.

During the debate on the Broadcasting Authority Bill in 1959 I think the Minister will admit that in their approach to the measure the Opposition were pretty reasonable.

I think the Opposition also recognised that the Minister appeared at that time to be reasonable especially in one respect, that was, the giving of information to Dáil Éireann. I should like to plead with him today not to burn his boats as he seems to have burned them when he replied to Questions Nos. 58, 59 and 60 on today's Order Paper and when, in fact, he refused to give any information. The Opposition trusted him in 1959 because the whole tenor of his speech was to the effect that when he could he would give information to Dáil Éireann.

On broad matters of policy.

He complimented the Opposition on one occasion because they did not appear to insist during that debate that he should have more control over broadcasting generally. The Minister is on record as having said that, and that again demonstrated how reasonable he thought the Opposition were and, in turn, how reasonable the Opposition expected him to be as well. During that discussion there were questions asked as to the Minister's function in regard to the Authority. At column 728, volume 180, of the Official Report of the 22nd March, 1960, the Minister said:

I should say here that the powers reserved to me in Section 31—that is, the veto section—to give certain directions to the Authority as regards programmes are not intended to provide for the continuous supervision and censorship of the Authority's programmes. Their main intent is to give me and the Government an overriding authority to veto programmes in certain circumstances in the public interest. The Government have an ultimate responsibility in this regard for a national broadcasting service and I think that the Government cannot get away from that responsibility.

At column 737 of the same volume the Minister said:

I want to point out that the Authority's first responsibility will be to the public and I have no doubt that as a responsible public body, it will take every possible precaution to avoid excessive commercialism. In any event I have powers under Section 20 to control the amount of advertising and its distribution throughout the programmes.

I do that, of course.

I have not finished yet. On the 31st March, at column 1575 of the same volume, Deputy Dr. Browne posed this question in regard to this matter of getting information:

Dr. Browne: I want to ask the Minister shall we be allowed to ask questions if we dislike a particular programme?

Mr. Hilliard: It will be possible to have the matter brought to the attention of the Minister and to the attention of the Authority. I would say there would not be anything to prevent a Deputy raising the matter in this House.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins: By question?

Mr. Hilliard: It could be a motion.

I suggest, whether the Minister accepts it or not, that what was conveyed to the Dáil on that occasion and what was conveyed to those Deputies who raised this matter of getting information was that the Minister would give all possible, reasonable information. He says here he would have a certain amount of control over programmes, not determine what programmes would be put on but their acceptability or otherwise to the general public. He also said in that debate that he would have a say as to the amount of advertising time. Why, therefore, does the Minister refuse to give to the House information in regard to the time devoted to advertising?

I am telling the House the amount of time that is provided.

Why did the Minister not tell Deputy McQuillan and Deputy Dr. Browne?

They asked something more than that. The percentage of time permitted per hour as advertising time, I am prepared to give that.

The Minister did not give it today.

I was not asked that.

I shall read Question No. 60:—

To ask the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the total average time to date in each month since its inauguration which has been devoted by Telefís Éireann to (a) live programmes, (b) filmed programmes of home origin, (c) filmed programmes of British origin and (d) filmed programmes of American origin.

In each month.

If the Minister were to give that information to the House, how would that be deemed to be interference in the day to day work of Telefís Éireann or Radio Éireann?

Within the time that is permitted——

This is reasonable information that Deputies and the public expect. The Minister is doing himself an injustice—he has been paid great compliments in this debate—if he refuses to give such simple information.

I would prefer to see such detailed information given in the annual report of the Authority.

It is too late then. The experience of this House is that annual reports do not come out until perhaps a year, and in some cases, two years, after the end of the financial year. I do not think it unreasonable that the House should be given this information, which certainly could not be deemed to be detrimental to the national interest or to Telefís Éireann.

The whole idea in the minds of the Opposition when the Broadcasting Authority Bill was discussed was to ensure that the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs would not appear to put himself in the same straitjacket as many other Ministers in his Government had done with regard to other State and semi-State bodies. I am all for State bodies. The Labour Party are certainly for the establishment of these State bodies, whether they are national concerns or industrial or commercial undertakings, but always with the reservation that reasonable information be given by the Minister responsible to Dáil Éireann and for the benefit of the public.

Again, let me say there is a growing uneasiness in the public mind that in respect of these concerns, there seems to be an air of secrecy which one would associate with a private company, where little or no information is forthcoming to Dáil Éireann and to members of the public. I do not think it would be unfair criticism to say that in respect of many of these State concerns, Ministers have got into the habit recently of giving all sorts of information about these companies outside Dáil Éireann. I should not be at all surprised—and I do not say he would do it maliciously—if the Minister were in the very near future to attend a dinner of wireless dealers or of a television traders' association and give much more information than was requested by two members of this House today. The Minister may not have done it, but many of his colleagues have and, in particular, the Minister for Transport and Power, who is glad to deluge the country with information when he gets to a dinner or a chamber of commerce meeting but is singularly reluctant, or unwilling, to give a tittle of the same information when asked questions in Dáil Éireann.

The Minister should be reasonable with the public, through Dáil Éireann. Nobody wants to advise him, but he, in turn, should advise the Television Authority that certain programmes should not be put on or that certain other programmes should be put on. The Minister has said himself—I think it is expressly stated in the Act—that he is responsible for seeing that the programmes presented by Telefís and Radio Éireann are such as will be acceptable to the people generally and in accord with the traditions and culture of the people, and that there is no offensive material shown or broadcast. I suggest the question tabled to-day was designed to ensure that canned programmes do not predominate on Telefís Éireann. I do not think they do as yet, but it is important for members of Dáil Éireann to know what the percentage of live programmes is as against programmes from Britain, America, or elsewhere, so that in three or four months' time, a similar question can be asked to make sure the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, whoever he will be, is doing his duty under the terms of the Broadcasting Authority Act.

I wonder if the Minister or his Department concerned themselves with what appeared recently on Telefís Éireann by way of advertisement for a certain Sunday newspaper. It was a most objectionable advertisement drawing attention to the fact that a series of articles would appear in connection with a nun who had left her convent and opened a nightclub, of which she became the queen. That was most offensive. Surely members of this House are entitled to question the Minister on a matter such as that. The Minister, in his own words, is responsible for the general type of programme presented on Telefís and Radio Éireann.

This is not, even though it may appear to be, an attack on the Minister. Telefís Éireann is but three months old. I merely want to ask the Minister quite sincerely not to continue to adopt the attitude he adopted here today and to release to the public, through the medium of answers to Parliamentary Questions, the type of information for which Deputies asked today. In my experience, and to my knowledge, Deputies have not embarrassed the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs over the past 15 or 16 years. They have been most reasonable in the type of question they have tabled. It is not sufficient for the Minister to say that one had better address a particular question to the Television Authority.

As far as the Labour Party are concerned, we do not believe that the director is a great hand at answering letters. Deputy Tully brought that matter to the attention of the Minister last Thursday. I do not believe the director would give the information the Minister seems to think he would, if requested by members of this House. He would be very reluctant to give it and there is no way in which he can be compelled to give it; but he is the nominee of the Minister and, therefore, the Minister can get the information for us. That is why I suggest that, so long as questions are reasonable and so long as the information requested is of a general type, the Minister should, first of all, seek it from the director, or the Board, and then reply to Deputies who table questions.

As far as Telefís Éireann itself is concerned, it is becoming almost monotonous now to be complimentary, but it should be said that Telefís Éireann has exceeded my expectations, certainly. If they can afford to have a greater percentage of live programmes in future, they will be well employed in presenting such programmes. Their live programmes at the moment are much better than the canned imported programmes. Apart from their general theme, the latter are ridiculously out of date. Some of them are ten, 12 or 15 years old. I assume they have been hired because they are relatively cheap. To that, I have no objection. We all realise Telefís Éireann have no great financial resources but, even with their limited resources, they can certainly be complimented on the excellence of their live programmes. As Deputy Tully said, they deserve particular commendation for their St. Patrick's Day programme. It was a feast of sport, music and drama. All who saw it were delighted with it. We admit the Minister has no responsibility for the programmes, but that does not preclude us from comment.

If I were to offer one criticism, it is that Telefís Éireann does not have enough music. It is mainly drama, comment, discussion. There is a certain amount of céilidh music. I do not particularly like céilidh music. There is very little light music. The sporting programmes have been particularly good and the efforts to link up with other stations have been very successful. I have in mind the Grand National, the Ireland v. England rugby match, and the three or four days racing at Cheltenham. Achievement there was excellent. There was an announcement yesterday that we may yet have a European link-up, followed by a transatlantic link. That will make television much more worth while. Even as it is, it is well worth while.

With the advent of television, the probability is that sound broadcasting will become a very small proportion of our radio entertainment in the future. I would ask the Minister to appeal to those people who have discarded their wireless sets to hand these sets over to the organisations catering for the blind. The Minister's voice will be heard much more quickly than mine. It would be an excellent idea if television viewers would hand over discarded wireless sets to these organisations so that those who cannot have the benefit of television can enjoy sound broadcasting.

I do not want to flog the question of telephones. The Minister has mentioned his difficulties in the matter of supplies. I do not think it is sufficient to say that we want to perfect our present telephone service. There are many people who cannot afford to wait. The Minister can do the two jobs. As Deputy M.P. Murphy said, it is not like fixing the Berlin problem. I know the Minister is a hard worker, but perhaps he would get his officials to think a little harder to see whether some of the people who have been particularly mentioned could be supplied. I shall not say I had many cases in my constituency, but I had two in particular who were given the usual turn-down, so well described by Deputy Kyne. Is there any reason why a market gardener should have to wait two years for a telephone?

It all depends. I would want to know the particulars.

I have given the particulars often enough. He is just a market gardener delivering within a radius of 20 miles. The other case concerns a motor hire agent, who does something in the tourist business in a very small way. He has been waiting two years. I am not making a particular case for these people—I am not even mentioning the names—but every possible effort should be made in cases like that.

There may be other people in the same locality or it may be a physical impossibility to give them a phone until there is some cable.

That may be, but as a general comment, I want to say that some effort should be made to provide telephones in such cases.

It is not as easy of solution as the Deputy says.

But it seems ridiculous to have to wait two years to get a telephone. I want to deal now with the question of employment with the engineering section. In some places, it is becoming a racket. The Minister has his regulations and he tells us that a man must be registered at the employment exchange, must have certain qualifications, must have a certain number in family and be in certain financial circumstances before he can get work.

That does not apply to people employed by the engineering branch. I do not interfere with the engineering branch with regard to whom they take on. They take them from the labour exchanges, interview them and decide themselves whom they will take on.

Who are "they"?

The engineering branch.

If my politics were not known in Wexford, I would know to whom to go for a job—and he would not be employed by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, either.

The allegation is made that it is Deputy Corish who gets everybody employed in the engineering branch in Wexford.

I should know my own record in that respect. I recently asked that a man who served for a period in the Congo be given a job with the engineering section, but they did not find it possible to employ him. I was a bit disgusted because of all the talk there had been about those who served in the Congo. Perhaps, I am not entirely right—he was offered a job a day after he decided to go back into the Army again. I made representations two or three times. If he had gone to another place, he would have been employed pretty quickly.

I want to refer to the responsibility the Department has in the matter of repairing foothpaths and roads which are torn up. Up to recently they have done a very bad job, a very skimpy job, indeed. In Wexford town paths and roadways have been glossed over with a thin layer of concrete which disintegrates in a matter of weeks. The Minister and his Department are not entirely responsible for that. To a very large extent it is the responsibility of the local authority, who should insist that the Department do their job. It was only recently, when the matter was brought to the attention of local authorities, that they realised their responsibilities. The Minister should send out some sort of general directive to the engineering personnel to endeavour to leave the roads and footpaths in a condition somewhat similar to the way they found them.

Having said all that, I want to pay my small tribute to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. As far as I am personally concerned, I have received nothing but courtesy from the Minister and his officials and the local staffs, be they postmen, telephonists or the clerks behind the counters. The Minister will agree that most of the criticism that has been levelled here has been constructive. Generally, the Department gives excellent service and is one of which we should be proud.

Perhaps the greatest problem facing the Department of Posts and Telegraphs is the problem of providing a telephone service for all who seek it. In recent times the demand for telephones has increased considerably and in my own constituency of East Limerick it is increasing at an enormous rate. I have almost daily correspondence from applicants for telephones, and from what I can judge the demand there will continue to increase. I fully appreciate the difficulties involved in meeting this demand. I realise it is absolutely essential, as the Minister pointed out, that the Department should concentrate on the improvement of the trunk and exchange services in order to avoid overloading of the system as a whole.

On this question of improving the trunk and exchange services, I note from the Minister's statement that equipment for the conversion of some 60 exchanges to automatic working has been delivered, that the work of installation will be carried out as rapidly as possible and that contracts have been placed for ordinary equipment for some 20 other areas. This is an indication that progress is being made, but we are still a long way from reaching the stage where the supply will catch up with the demand. A notable feature of the demand in my constituency has been the number of farmers seeking telephones. This is understandable. I have been in touch with one aspect of radiotelephony—the extension of the microwave circuit. From what I have been told by a number of engineering friends, this has exciting possibilities. It is possible to envisage in the course of time that the present overhead telephone wires and the telephone poles which are bringing the telephone service to most of our homes will become obsolete. This microwave system seems to be the thing of the future. I understand that the question of cost is the big deterring factor to the more extensive use of this type of equipment. It is good to see developments along the most modern scientific lines and from what the Minister has said about the developments in the basic system— the trunk and exchange systems—I look forward to a stepping up in the provision of telephones in the coming year.

I noted also from the Minister's speech that progress has been made in the matter of the erection of new buildings and in the improvement of existing ones. I welcome in particular the announcement that plans are under way for the improvement of the Limerick Post Office, and I hope this will be pressed forward without undue delay.

There is the question of the staffs in the various grades of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Here I am glad to see that an improvement in conditions has been granted to practically 90 per cent. of the personnel. I should like, however, to add my humble voice to those already raised on behalf of the auxiliary postmen and the subpostmasters. The matter has been dealt with at length by various other Deputies and beyond mentioning its merits I shall not dwell on it here. I was glad to hear the Minister say he is to meet the subpostmasters and I hope the outcome of the discussions will be satisfactory.

On the question of staff, there is another problem I should like to mention. It refers to promotion prospects. I mention this because it is a question that has given rise to a certain amount of worry and anxiety in one particular office in my constituency. It concerns the promotion of supervisory grades and applies particularly to large offices. I think promotion to supervisory grades in large offices should be made from within the staff of the particular office concerned.

Several Deputies referred to Telefís Éireann. On the whole, the television authority and, indeed, all connected with the service are to be complimented on the progress that has been made. Deputy Crinion last week said he would like to see Telefís Éireann teams going down the country more often. As one who, like Deputy Crinion, has the privilege of being associated with a number of rural organisations, I am in entire agreement with him. He mentioned one source of television material in rural Ireland—the drama groups. There is another activity which to my mind lends itself admirably to television.

I refer to the community development projects of all kinds which are being carried on throughout the length and breadth of rural Ireland. In almost every parish particularly where you have guilds of Muintir na Tíre, there are to be found wonderful examples of how community effort, local initiative and self reliance have been successfully organised into projects which have become of benefit to the community as a whole. We have examples of how this community effort has resulted in the building of parish halls, in the promotion of local industries, of agricultural co-operatives and so forth. The story of these projects, told through the medium of television, would serve as an inspiration and an example to other groups to embark on similar projects. It would lead certainly to an extension of the community idea and the community spirit.

There is just one last point I should like to raise under this heading—one aspect of Telefís Éireann which has given rise to a considerable amount of adverse comment. It is the presentation of political programmes. I do not intend to dwell on this matter at any length but I feel obliged to express the hope that there will be no repetition of the theatricals which accompanied the Taoiseach's recent appearance on the occasion of the Common Market symposium. If political programmes are to become a regular feature of Telefís Éireann— and I hope they are—then, as Deputy Dillon pointed out, certain minimum standards should be laid down. I suppose it is inevitable that our infant television service should have certain defects and I am sure that in the light of experience these will be ironed out, but I would make a special appeal for objectivity and impartiality in the matter of political programmes.

Personally, I look to television as a powerful medium for inculcating in our people, especially in our youth, a sense of pride in and respect for our parliamentary institutions. I also look upon it as a means of creating a greater interest in and better understanding of the work of a Christian democracy such as ours.

I had not intended saying anything on this Estimate, but having listened to a speech in the House yesterday evening which was largely devoted to a criticism of Telefís Éireann, I decided to make a few comments. Every Deputy has a perfect right to be as critical as he thinks fit, but I think the speech I refer to could and should only be regarded as the opinion of an individual, and I might even go so far as to say a crank, not in any way representative of the views of the majority of the people in this House.

If we are to be honest about this thing we must admit—in fact, I think we should be glad to admit—that Telefís Éireann has been a much greater success than most people thought it could or would be. I think the Minister and the staff of Telefís Éireann deserve to be complimented. They deserve the congratulations of every member of the House both for the extremely successful start they have made and for the sustained high standard of the productions generally. I have had the pleasant experience of visiting Montrose and I must say I was very favourably impressed by most things. The main thing that impressed me was the youth, the enthusiasm, the courtesy and ability of the staff. I came away with the impression that there is a very bright future before Telefís Éireann.

I want to deal with the Minister's policy regarding the development of the telephone service. I may say I am not in agreement with that policy although if I was in possession of all the facts, I might be more pleased with it. It is all wrong to spend so much time, effort and money on the improvement and streamlining of the existing services, and at the same time to hold up the demand for a limited service to a very large section of the community, that large section situated in the more remote parts of the country where a limited service would be of inestimable value. I am considering particularly the members of the farming community.

The farmer may not have many calls to make and if a line is overloaded he can always get in touch with the local exchange and tell them to let him know when a line will be open. He may be able to wait an hour or so but in many cases it might save him a long journey and a lot of time. The Minister could do a lot more of that work if he did not spend so much time and effort on improving our trunk lines and on automation generally. I am not so sure that it is a good thing to be so concerned about automation particularly when we are exporting a good number of our operators. I would ask the Minister to give this limited service to the greatest possible number of people. The streamlining of the existing services reminds me of a local authority talking about swimming pools when large numbers of people have not got roofs over their heads.

This brings me to the question of the repair and maintenance service. I am not satisfied that service is a good one. There is something wrong. I had experience of one institution where for a number of years there was a lot of difficulty with the telephone. They were advised to put in a P.B.X. which was supposed to give peace in our time but they have never been out of trouble since they installed that. It is continually out of order. I discussed this matter with some of the service people and they tell me that instead of being in charge of X installations they are in charge of X plus. I cannot remember the figures. They say that when they come along to look at something that is in difficulty they cannot devote the necessary time to it as they are constantly going from one place to another. It is something that the Minister could look into.

The telephone rental system is something that I could never understand. I know that business people pay more for their telephones than ordinary residential people. I do not know why that is so. They pay their rent and then they pay for their calls. The whole thing does not seem equitable to me. I do not think there is sufficient money spent on the telephone service. It is a section of the Post Office that has always more than paid its way. There should be a considerable increase in the amount of money spent on the telephone service and that expenditure would pay rich dividends in quite a short time.

I remember 30 years ago in a certain part of the country when deliveries were made at 8.30 in the morning by foot post. That poor man has now gone his way and the job is done by delivery van and the people are lucky if they get their post between 11 and 12 o'clock. There is something wrong in the routing and I do not believe money is being saved. I know another case where two postmen deliver in the one area from two different post offices. One delivers to one side of the road and the other to the other side. That indicates overlapping.

I should like to refer to a few points especially in so far as they relate to my own county. Out of this vast sum of money provided for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs the poor man appears to come out the poorer. I should also like to draw attention to the position of the auxiliary postman. He has to be up early in the morning and has to be out in all kinds of weather every day in the week. I think a man like that who gives 40 years' service to the Department and to the State is deserving of a pension. I also think he is deserving of better payment than he is getting.

The same can be said of the subpostmasters. The pittance they are getting is very miserable, indeed, and I ask the Minister to review it. It is hard to understand the conditions under which auxiliary postmen are appointed. I know of three cases one of which I mentioned to the Minister already so I will not deal with it again. Since that another case has come up of a married man with a family of five living in a labourer's cottage. He was appointed as an auxiliary postman and was in the position for one day. The following day a single man came into the job and I regret to say that his appointment seemed to have a political aspect. I am very sorry to have to say it but no other interpretation is possible, because he was secretary of a Fianna Fáil cumann, or so I am told. There was another case, again of a married man, with eight children. He was on the dole and had been acting as postman for some time but when the appointment was made, a single young lad who was an only child got it.

They were all Fianna Fáil?

Every one of them—they would not have got the job otherwise.

I do not begrudge the appointments to the people who got them. I am merely pointing out to the Minister what did happen, and I am prepared to give him the cases in his own office to examine. It would be a pity if such a fine service as the postal service undoubtedly is should fall into disrepute as a result of such actions. I think the Minister will agree with me in that.

There is a small point I should like to make which concerns Sligo to a great extent. It is in connection with postal addresses. There is a big area in Sligo, the address of which is Boyle, County Roscommon, and at another end of the county, there is an area the address of which is Ballina, County Mayo. That is rather confusing. If the Minister could look into the matter, it might be possible to have a county address within the county. I had a chat with somebody on that matter and I understand that it is under consideration. It would simplify sorting, as the Minister said, and reduce the risk of delay in delivery.

Another matter that causes great difficulty in Sligo, and a question that has been raised here several times, is the installation of new telephones. I have one case in mind of a man who built a garage, for which a phone is absolutely essential. I shall give the particulars to the Minister and he may be able to expedite the matter.

I was sorry to see by the report of the Department that there was a reduction in the rate of connections, with a consequential increase in the long list of people awaiting installation. I appreciate the difficulties, having read the Minister's statement. This is a service for which there is a tremendous demand. In view of that demand, even if it meant the provision of extra money by the Department of Finance, that extra money should be sought and granted. The demand exists and there is a return in the form of charges to subscribers.

I should like to refer to a question that I put down to the Minister for answer to-day in connection with Collooney. I did not catch the reply. I wanted to ask a supplementary question, namely, if the Minister was aware that there are five industries in the village of Collooney?

Yes; I know that.

These five industries and the other subscribers make a tremendous demand on the existing system. I understand from the Minister's reply to my question that he is having something done about the matter.

It is at the exchange at Sligo the trouble is. There are not sufficient outlets from the Sligo office and that is where the trouble is.

Is improvement expected?

Yes, but it will take some time to effect the improvement.

I am sure the Minister appreciates that delay is not good for efficiency in the factories there.

That is correct.

Therefore, I would ask the Minister to expedite the matter. I should like very briefly to refer to television. I am glad to see that the 405 line sets in the area served by Truskmore, County Sligo, will not be made obsolete without a year's notification. That is very welcome news to that area. May I make a suggestion? I should like to see a research council set up in conjunction with the Department of Education to consider the impact of television on education. I understand that such research councils have been established in other countries. It would be a constructive and helpful gesture on the part of the Government if they were to establish such a research council which, in addition to studying the impact on education, could study generally the use of visual aids in national, secondary and vocational schools.

Another point that has occurred to me is that if we enter the European Economic Community, it would be worth considering doing languages on television, especially French.

Having said all that, I should like to pay a tribute to the service and to say a special word of thanks to the "Hello girls" whom we never see but who are courteous, prompt and efficient to each and every one of us.

At the commencement of the debate, the Leader of the Opposition made reference to the Estimate and the increase contained therein as "a little Budget"—"an extra Budget", "a pre-Budget" other Deputies called it—regardless of the fact that it has been the policy of this State under this and previous Administrations to make certain as far as possible that the Post Office one year with another would pay its way and that it was regarded as a cardinal principle in its business operations that increased wages, and increased rates of remuneration, would be met by increased charges obtained from the users of the services that the Post Office provides. Every Deputy who presses me to deal with pensions for auxiliary postmen, for increased wages for auxiliary postmen, for increased remuneration for sub-postmasters and for further postal and other services that involve additional expenditure, is, in fact, pressing me to increase postal charges. There is no other method by which we can obtain the necessary money to pay for such increases. As I indicated in my introductory statement, we have gone to the limit to obtain increased productivity and to secure economy in the service.

When I came to this office in July, 1959, as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, I was confronted with a very formidable task in providing the country with the foundation upon which a new television service could be built. It was a task of no mean magnitude. It absorbed a good deal of my time and attention for many months after I became Minister for Posts and Telegraphs.

However, I was not long Minister for Posts and Telegraphs until I began to realise that there was another service that needed additional attention. That situation came to my notice in the reports that come to the Minister from the branch of the Post Office that deals with telephones: in the returns from that branch on rates of connection, the number of connections made each month, the number on the waiting list and also in correspondence coming to me in relation to delays to telephone calls and in the course of consultation with the officials of my Department who come to the Minister in the normal way to discuss problems in their various branches. Moreover, it was also forcibly brought to my notice in this House by Deputies of all Parties on my first and second Estimates that the telephone service in this country was deteriorating, that it was very bad at times, that it was impossible during certain periods to get calls without long delays in answering and that it was a service that needed building up.

In consultation with the officials of the Department, I had a thorough examination made of the exact position of the telephone service obtaining throughout the country. If you want a fair picture of the situation that confronted or confronts the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in this matter you will have to take into consideration the capital investment that has gone into this service over the years.

This service was inherited from the British. They had a telephone service here. In his own colourful way, Deputy Dillon made reference to the mentality that existed in relation to the telephone service in the British Treasury. He sought to convince the House that the same mentality operates in the Department of Finance and in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs here and that we should get away from that.

It is all right for Deputy Dillon, in Opposition, to advance ideas along those lines. Deputy Dillon was twice a Minister in this country and so was Deputy Sweetman and so were many other Deputies on the opposite side of this House. They had the privilege of providing telephone capital through the Telephone Capital Acts for the further development of the telephone service.

It is easy to be wise afterwards. It is easy for Deputy Dillon, Deputy Sweetman, Deputy Norton and other Deputies like myself to be wise after the event. However, if ever a Government had an opportunity of investing a large amount of capital in telephone development I think it was the Government that came into office in 1948. They obtained the American Marshall Aid Loan. Had they been so inclined, they could have made a very substantial investment of that money in telephone development in addition to the provision they made under the 1951 Telephone Capital Act. I quite believe that some of the capital provided for them in 1951 could have been provided by way of the Marshall Aid Loan. I am not in that fortunate position.

I shall now give the figures and the years of the Telephone Capital Acts. Generally speaking, telephone capital is provided on a five-yearly basis under those Acts. Under the Telephone Capital Act, 1924, a sum of £500,000 was provided. The next was in 1927 and, under it, a sum of £500,000 was provided. The next was in 1931 and it provided for a sum of £250,000. The next was in 1936 and it provided for a sum of £500,000. Then came the Telephone Capital Act, 1938, which provided for £1,000,000. In the Act of 1946 some serious effort was made to invest a considerable amount of capital in telephone development: it provided for £6,000,000. The next Act came in 1951, providing for £8,000,000. Then followed the Act of 1956, providing for £6,000,000.

When I came into office in 1960 as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs I introduced a Telephone Capital Bill to provide £10,000,000 for the current five-year period. We must relate the activities of the Engineering Branch of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs to the amount of capital provided to enable it to do the work in hand to provide the country with an efficient and smoothly-running telephone service.

You cannot buy telephone equipment as one would purchase tin mugs in a hardware establishment. It must be tendered for. Contracts must be placed with manufacturers. It has got to be made to specification. There are many, many months of delay in delivery. The manufacturers require 1½ years, 2 years, maybe 2½ years, to complete the contracts placed. A system that needs equipment of that nature must be planned well in advance. The men who provide and maintain that system—the engineers in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs—must in fact plan years in advance for the work they must do to improve this service.

That is one of the reasons why it is not possible at this stage to have a number of schemes going together. The establishment and recruitment of a trained engineering staff is a problem but it is not an overriding problem in this regard. The engineering staff, when geared to certain work, continue with that work at a certain pace. It is not so easy to get them to change over to a different class of work or to increase the pace of working in a short time. You must know in advance what capital you will have to invest in the system, what contracts you can place, so that you will know in advance whether you can pay for the equipment you would like and intend to order for telephone development.

We wish to continue to connect new telephone subscribers as quickly as possible but we do not want to take them into a system that is not capable of giving them the service they expect. It is not a new thing to have a waiting list for new telephones in the Department. I do not think the engineering staff in years have caught up with the number of applicants for new telephones. It is true that the waiting list at the end of this year was higher than ever before at 10,000. In 1960-61 the engineering branch connected over 15,000 new subscribers. Last year they connected over 14,000. That is no mean achievement in two years.

When the 1960 Telephone Capital Act was introduced by me, it provided for the expenditure of £10,000,000 over five years at the rate of £2,000,000 per year. Last year, I found, on further examination of the situation and on further advice from the engineering branch and officials of the Department, that the backlog of reconstruction work was of such a nature that it would require greater effort and more capital to carry out work urgently needed and put on the long finger for years. I decided it would be much better to make certain that we would be in a position to give smooth-running and efficient telephone service to existing subscribers, some of whom for many years had been good customers of the post office and expected to get an efficient service, rather than continue at an accelerated rate connecting new subscribers into a system that, perhaps, would not be able to give them the service they should get.

At the rate at which we are spending the capital provided under the 1960 Act, it will not cover the five-year period and I shall have to come again to the House for a further investment under a new Telephone Act. It is well-known that capital is not unlimited here. We are living in a small community, limited in respect of economic advancement. The Grey Book published by Mr. Whittaker, Secretary of the Department of Finance, over five years ago gave certain facts in relation to the economic situation. The Government subsequently published their Programme for Economic Expansion and that showed clearly the capital available for investment in all sectors of the State over the five years that have passed. Capital for telephone development must take its place in the overall picture in relation to State investment in the public sector and in relation to capital made available in the private sector also. For years the Department was far down in the queue for its capital requirements and I should be very glad if I could advance its position. When Deputy Dillon was speaking I asked if he were making the case for fresh thinking in regard to capital for telephone development because if he was I fully agree with him.

The demand for new telephones has doubled in the past seven years. Deputy Gallagher said it would double in another six or seven years. If it does we would need to think in terms of investment of up to £25,000,000 over a short period. I do not know if that is possible in our circumstances but it is a problem to which I have given much attention and so long as I remain in office I shall continue to do so and to do the best I can to provide a smooth-running and efficient telephone service. I hope as a result of the efforts made in future the telephone branch will be able to connect subscribers on demand or at least within a reasonable time after demand.

We have a large number of exchanges in which to provide equipment. Trunk and carrier lines must be provided out of exchanges all over the country. The long cables that are laid in the ground must also be provided and other work of that nature carried out. It cannot be done in a great hurry because there are long delays in the delivery of equipment urgently needed. In my opening statement I think I went as far as I could to give Deputies a fair picture of the situation that confronted me and I suppose I should be foolish if I thought that the debate would pass over without serious notice being taken of the number on the waiting list for telephones. But I noticed that very few Deputies complained of delay in the service or made any reference to a deterioration in the call-and-answer service on the telephone. We know that in different parts of the country it is a physical impossibility to provide new telephones because the equipment is not there to make the connection.

Does the Minister mean that the switchboard is full?

Yes, the switchboard is full; and there are not sufficient outlets in other instances, but in whatever parts of the country a service can be provided for new telephone subscribers, they will be taken in. It may appear strange to Deputies that here in the city of Dublin, which is the centre of activity, there are areas in which it is not possible to give service to waiting applicants because the applications are deferred pending the laying of additional underground cables. The cables will include such places as Ballsbridge, Cabra, Ballybough, Raheny, Coolock, Crumlin, Dún Laoghaire and Dolphin's Barn. It did include of course Finglas and Whitehall and all that area, and the new cable has been put in there and the job was finished last year. The same applies to other parts of the country.

I do not think it is necessary for me to talk about the delay on trunk calls. Every effort is made to keep delays to a minimum. At peak periods, we know that it is almost impossible for the staff to give a speedy service to the subscribers because of the overloading in the exchanges, especially in Dublin, during the peak periods. When the Canada Cup was on, and when Prince. Rainier and Princess Grace were here, I felt that the strain on the telephone exchanges was terrific. The staff who handled the increased traffic deserve the best thanks of this House. They worked under difficulties and at that time there were long delays in answering many subscribers in Dublin. They could not understand why and it was difficult to get them to understand why there should be such long delays. The fact is that the service was not able to provide for them because there were not sufficient outlets in the exchanges.

Can the Minister give the House an assurance that none of that delay was due to shortage of staff?

No, it was not due to shortage of staff. That is a fact.

That was the general impression at the time——

I know that.

——and it is as well that it should be confirmed that it was otherwise.

I should like to deal with the demand for public telephones and the many questions that come to me about that matter. I mean of course the street kiosks. In 1961, a total of 80 street kiosks was erected, 12 in Dublin city, to make a total of 368, and 68 in the provinces, to make 560, or 928 in all. It is proposed to provide 75 kiosks this year, say, 25 in Dublin and 50 in the provinces. One must of course plan the provision of these kiosks. We cannot provide too many of them in the one year. We must make certain that they will pay their way as far as we possibly can. If we were to erect them ad lib., and put our capital into telephone kiosks, we would be using it for a purpose that was not as urgent as the other types of work I have already indicated. Along with that, if they are erected in places where they will not pay their way, the telephone subscribers will be bearing the burden and we must protect the telephone subscriber, whether he is a farmer, a businessman, or an ordinary individual who has a telephone for social reasons.

As a rule, towns with a population under the 500 mark would not support two public telephones and accordingly the call-office in the local office is used. The advantage of the kiosk is that it provides a 24-hour service as against the call-office which is normally available to the public only when the post office is open. As I say, kiosks are provided only in places where they pay their way, that is, in towns, and as the installation and maintenance charges are high, there are necessarily limits on the number that can be provided in any particular town. The primary aim is to provide one kiosk in every town where it will pay its way and where a continuous service can be given. It is hoped that all towns with a population of 200 and over will have at least one kiosk by the end of this year.

From time to time, I receive requests for the provision of public telephones in remote rural areas where there is no post office, and where post offices are not warranted, usually for emergency purposes, such as, for instance, when it is necessary to call a priest or a doctor or contact a fire station or something like that. Similarly, requests are received on the grounds that such facilities would be of great assistance to tourists. The answer to all such requests is that the public telephone is provided only in public offices, or in street kiosks where revenue adequate to recover the erection and maintenance charges can be anticipated. The Department has gone as far as it can in providing public telephone facilities throughout the country. Ordinarily telephones for public use at places where there are no post offices or where the likely user would not support a kiosk can be provided only on a rental basis.

Deputy Dillon and other Deputies asked about the microwave links. They are more economic than underground cabling in certain circumstances. The requirements in every case must, however, be taken into account. Microwave links are not likely to be used entirely in replacement of cables. Another question was in relation to the priority list for the installation of telephones. There is a priority list in the Department drawn up for some time and it is given to certain well defined categories of people— doctors, dentists and firms giving considerable employment. Those outside that list are considered on their merits. A large number of claims for priorities are made on compassionate grounds, but while I would like to give priority to all of them, it is just not possible to do so without widening the list to such an extent as to make nonsense of it.

In so far as complaints about the dialling of trunk calls are concerned, it is possible to get wrong numbers occasionally as when dialling local calls. It is possible to encounter technical faults when dialling trunk calls also. However, we have not got in the Department very many complaints in relation to faulty dialling, and it may be that Deputy Dillon or Deputy Sweetman may have had just a bad time in not getting connected when they dialled. Certainly we have no general complaints in relation to faulty dialling.

The trouble is that when you get faulty dialling, you have been held up so long getting the right number that you have not time after that to ring up and complain.

Deputy Sherwin raised the question of people using obscene language on telephones. It is very difficult to identify persons who make nuisance calls and use obscene language on the telephone, but any complaints received are specially investigated and a number of prosecutions are in fact taken each year.

Deputy Corish raised the question of replacement of roadways and footpaths and other work carried out being of very poor quality. My information is that nearly all the work of replacement of footpaths and roadways opened by the Department is undertaken by the local authority concerned on the basis of repayment of the cost by the Department.

Deputy Lynch of Waterford referred to a case in Waterford in which a telephone call to some island in the Mediterranean was charged incorrectly to a neighbour's account. He asked whether if somebody booked such a call in Waterford and gave his number, the call would be charged to him. It is most unlikely that such a call would be connected immediately. The caller would be told that he would be rung back later, and in that event the call would be offered to Deputy Lynch's telephone. It is most unlikely that such a thing could arise, unless there was some collusion with somebody in the Post Office. I do not believe that such a thing would happen.

Surely the telephone operator has a means of verifying whether the number you give is correct.

Yes, he has.

I hoped that there would be some method of doing that. It would be too easy otherwise.

Many Deputies raised the question of objectivity and impartiality in television programmes. When speaking on the Second Stage of the Broadcasting Authority Bill in this House, I said that the Government had taken the view that the Authority should be quite free to exercise its function of providing a national service, and that the power of intervention by the Minister or the Government should be confined to a small number of matters in which State interests must be maintained, and the Authority would therefore have the maximum freedom in the matter of programmes.

Under Section 18 (1) of the Act, it is the duty of the Authority to secure that when it broadcasts any information, news or feature which relates to matters of public controversy or is the subject of current public debate, the information, news, or feature is presented objectively and impartially and without any expression of the Authority's own views. I am satisfied that the Authority is conscious of its obligation to observe objectivity and impartially in its programmes. I should like to make it clear, however, that I share the Authority's view that apart from any scheme of political Party broadcasts which it may agree directly with the political Parties on such matters as the Budget or a general election, it should be free to invite any Minister of State or any politician or any trade unionist or whoever else it wishes to appear before the cameras at any time.

I am of course not in a position to give the Authority any direction regarding the prominence to be given to any person appearing in any programme or the way in which any particular programme should be produced. Those are matters which must be left to the Authority's programme staff, whose function it is to decide what prominence is professionally justified in the programme for which it is responsible. I agree with Deputy Dillon, however, that in general it is desirable that if leaders of political Parties appear in a television programme, they ought to be presented in the same way.

Hear, hear!

The same thing would apply to debates in the House if they were brought in, that they should be presented in the same way. Having said that, I do not propose to say any more in relation to the protest made by Deputy Dillon in this regard.

Regarding Deputy Dillon's reference to the Authority's annual report——

Before the Minister leaves the political end, would he consider discussing with the Television Authority the provision of the script for the political broadcasts or proceedings in the House on the basis that we are never able to see them ourselves?

I do not agree with the Deputy at all that the scripts should be provided.

It would make it inevitable that they would be objective.

I know that the Deputy does not see or hear the reports of the Dáil. I do not either. I am at this disadvantage.

Both of us are.

I never look at the script and I do not see any sound reason for providing the script. Regarding Deputy Dillon's reference to the Television Authority's annual report, I should like to make it clear that I am very glad of the way in which he and other Deputies took the matter of the non-presentation of last year's report. I regret that I did not have it ready prior to the initiation of this debate. I shall see that it is in the hands of Deputies as soon as I possibly can.

I should like to make it clear that the annual reports and statements of accounts will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas, but that does not mean that there will automatically be a debate on them. They could be the subject of discussion on a motion, but normally they would be discussed only on the annual Estimate for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs.

Deputy Tully and other Deputies raised the question of interference with BBC and UTV programmes. I dealt with this matter in reply to a recent Parliamentary Question and in a long statement issued to the press on 9th March, 1962, and in my reply on the Adjournment Debate on 20th March, 1962. I fully set out the position in relation to all this matter. I want to say now that the advice I got was from highly qualified engineers who had the advantage of consultation with other highly qualified engineers from other countries who had experience of this type of problem. Deputy Sweetman and Deputy Ryan have not stated what technical qualifications their advisers possess, but if I understood Deputy Sweetman correctly his adviser was a television amateur or somebody like that.

The second comment I wish to make is that I have not refused to give the reasons for the present assignments. It is true that I did not reply to a supplementary question on the 1st March regarding a suggestion that the Mount Leinster channel be used for the Cork transmitter, but in a statement issued to the press on 9th March, I indicated that channel D was assigned to Cork to minimise interference with Kippure on channel 7. I would also point out that in my reply to a Parliamentary Question by Deputy Sweetman on the 22nd March I indicated that even a modified channel D would not be satisfactory for Mount Leinster because of the Stockholm assignment for new stations on channel 6 in Great Britain and the Six Counties including in particular Black Mountain (Belfast), Llangollen (Wales), and Stockland Hill in Devon. I have already said there was never any question of deliberately trying to blot out UTV or BBC. If Deputy Ryan or anybody else chooses to believe otherwise, I can do nothing about it.

Deputy Ryan yesterday evening delivered a speech here to which one could take grave exception, if one wished. He seemed to be annoyed that I did not accept what I would call the brains carrier advice he gave. We all know what the brains carrier is. Anybody who was reared or ever lived in rural Ireland knows he is a man who goes into his neighbour's field when he sees him assembling a few cattle to sell at the fair or mart. He will advise his neighbour what he should get for them and how many cwts. they will weigh. Or you will get him in the next man's field advising the farmer how he should plough it, what he should sow, how he should fertilise it, regardless of the fact that that farmer has at his disposal technical knowledge of the highest order from the local agricultural committee or can have soil tests taken for him in the institutions provided for him in the State. This man will drop into his neighbour on Sunday evening if he hears his neighbour is engaged or about to be engaged in litigation. He will offer him legal advice on the rules of evidence, quote procedure and all the rest of it, regardless of the fact that the litigant, or the intending litigant, can obtain on demand and on payment to a qualified solicitor or a barrister all the advice he needs.

Deputy Ryan comes in here and thinks I should accept the advice he obtained from some anonymous person and operate a television service on that advice. There are highly qualified people in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs operating Telefís Éireann and Radio Éireann. They were assembled with the representatives of all the other administrations in Stockholm. There were assembled the best television brains in Europe and they decided on a plan of allocation of frequencies for the television services within each administration. I want to tell Deputy Ryan and any other Deputy that as long as I am Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, I shall accept the advice of the people whose careers and reputations are at stake on the advice they tender to a Minister in dealing with this complex and very difficult problem.

Deputy Dr. Browne yesterday evening delivered in retrospect a sort of Second Reading speech on the Television Bill. As I have said already, the Bill has been passed and in it are incorporated the principles the Deputy does not like, that is, that television is under the control of an independent authority and not under the control of the Minister. In any event, it is surely wise to wait a few years to see how the Authority works before one passes any strict or stringent judgment on it.

Deputy Dr. Browne and other Deputies during the course of the debate made very useful suggestions about the place of the language, of education, and so on, in the television service. I would wish the Television Authority, on reading the debate, to take note of whatever suggestions are made here by Deputies to see if any of those suggestions would be useful to them in the carrying out of their functions.

Deputy Dr. Browne also made reference to the presentation of violence in the television programmes. He seemed to think we should eliminate completely cowboy films. When speaking on the Second Stage of the Broadcasting Authority Bill I said the Authority would have the maximum freedom in the matter of programmes and that it was not proposed there should be provision for any censorship of programmes. My feeling was that the Authority would be a responsible public body and that we could be confident that proper moral standards would be respected in the programmes. In the same way, I feel the Authority can be trusted to ensure that undue violence will not be allowed on Telefís Éireann programmes. I cannot agree at all with Deputy Dr. Browne that no violence should appear on the television screen. Violence is part of life and if Telefís Éireann is to do its job properly, it will have to hold the mirror up to nature.

I suppose that proposition is subject to some limitations.

It is, certainly. Deputy Kyne raised the question of radio interference in Dungarvan. He asked how people in Dungarvan can arrange to have complaints about interference with radio reception investigated. The answer is that people who suffer from radio interference and who are satisfied they have an efficient aerial system and that their household equipment is in order should write to Radio Éireann giving particulars of the interference. All powers for the investigation and detection of interference were conferred on Radio Éireann under the Broadcasting Authority Act (Control of Interference) Order, 1960.

Deputy Dillon referred to queuing in post offices. I am afraid that queues are part and parcel of modern life.

Not in my shop. I would not have one very long if they were.

There are long queues even to get into this House when there is an election on.

Which are sorted out quickly enough.

We have to queue for buses, in banks and in shops. On some occasions we have to queue to go into the church on Sundays. We have to queue in the Division Lobbies in this House. Therefore, the Post Office is really in step with the rest of the world. To obviate queuing by having enough staff to deal with every customer as he enters the post office would send our costs skyhigh and could not be entertained. The most we can do is to watch the flow of customers and to adjust our staff within reasonable limits to give the best service possible.

I was suggesting to the Minister that there should be some flexibility.

I frequently stand in queues where ladies are fiddling with parcels or else trying to sell me prize bonds but not one of them would sell me a threepenny stamp. They ought to open another hatch.

The Department look at all that occasionally and keep it under review.

There is no use offering me a prize bond when I want a threepenny stamp.

Deputy Kyne said there was a rumour that the Department had bought a site for £3,500 for a new post office at Dungarvan. That is not so. The Department is now negotiating with a private person in relation to the purchase of another site, but I am not at liberty to disclose the figure. The figure given by the Deputy is not correct at all. It is a fact that the U.D.C. offered a site valued at £600 by the Valuation Office, but the price asked for by the U.D.C. which included the cost of providing alternative accommodation for the council's stores was altogether prohibitive.

Deputy O.J. Flanagan raised the question of silence cabinets in sub-post offices throughout the country. Cabinets are provided in all suboffices where more than two or three calls per week are made. In many cases, cabinets cannot be provided because there is not space available for them. If there is a volume of business passing through any of the offices Deputy Flanagan has in mind, I shall certainly look into the position to see if it is physically possible to provide cabinets in them. Sometimes it is physically impossible. Sometimes the ceiling is not high enough to allow a cabinet to be installed.

If that should be the case, perhaps the Minister would consider putting a kiosk outside the sub-post office.

It depends on whether there is sufficient business.

A kiosk is not all that dear.

We know it is not, but when you add up the price of a large number of kiosks, that total eats into the capital available for the essential trunk work and constructional work needed to give an efficient service. Everything takes its place in the queue. There is another queue in this.

The sooner these queues are eliminated from the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, the better it will be for everybody——

The Deputy had his opportunity when his Government were handling the Marshall Aid Loan. They did not invest much of it in the Post Office services.

We put a telephone in every Garda barracks in Ireland.

That was a wonderful achievement.

I thought it was. I was proud of it, and I was largely responsible for recommending it. I think it was a good thing.

Deputy Sweetman asked whether the telex service was profitable. It is not possible to give exact figures for revenue and expenditure. The cost of maintenance of the network cannot be segregated from the cost of maintaining the general telegraph service. I am, however, quite satisfied that the telex service is making a modest profit.

Deputy Sweetman also asked what was the reason for the persistent loss on the telegraph service. I should like to say that the loss on this service has been greatly reduced in recent years. For example, in 1954-55, the loss was £378,000 as against an estimated figure of £135,000 for 1961-62. This reduction is partly due to a complete reorganisation which gave more working and replaced it by a combined telephone-teleprinter transmission of messages, and partly to increased charges and falling traffic. There is no increased charge this year.

God knows, half-a-crown is enough.

Staff costs 75 per cent. of all expenditure on the telegraph service, although, as I said in my opening statement, the staff employed on the service has been reduced by nearly 500. With costs increasing because of pay awards, it will readily be understood that it is very difficult to prevent the loss from rising again.

In regard to cross-Channel mail services and what happens when airports are fog-bound. The mails are diverted to surface conveyance. Deputy Sweetman complained of delay in respect of letters posted in London. At present letters must be posted early in the afternoon in London in order to connect with the plane from Manchester to Dublin. This drawback has been recognised by both the British Post Office and ourselves and we hope soon to announce the introduction of a new night airmail service between London and Dublin, which will make the latest posting time in London much more favourable.

Deputy Sweetman asked about awards for special work. There is a scheme of awards for suggestions in existence in the Department. The matter of the date-stamping machine which was invented by an officer of the Engineering Branch was also raised by Deputy Sweetman. That has not yet been considered under the scheme. It will come up for consideration, but the matter is complicated by the patent angle.

The question of the appointment of subpostmasters and auxiliary postmen was raised. The appointment of the former is no simple matter. I have already explained the method here. I gave the House the history of the institution of the board, when it was established in 1951, and the procedure under which applications are invited and received. I indicated that the local head postmaster usually makes a factual report on each applicant. The papers are sent to the Appointments Branch in the Department. That branch comments on the reports, setting them in order. They pass the reports on to the subpostmasters' board. That board deals with the applications. By their terms of reference, they cannot recommend to me any more than three people. Therefore, if eight people apply, there are five people whom I cannot consider at all. In some cases, there may be more. There are a number who are ineligible to be appointed.

I want to make it clear that I do not sit with the board when they are deliberating or making their recommendations. They make their recommendations according to their terms of reference. They must satisfy themselves as to the suitability of the applicant, his financial standing, and the suitability of his premises for the purpose for which it was intended. The report comes to me. I make the appointment. I accept full responsibility for every appointment I have made and for every appointment I shall make. So long as I am in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, I shall try so far as I possibly can to appoint people who will discharge the duties of their office reasonably well.

There are Deputies who make representations to me in relation to these appointments. They come from all Parties. I do not pass on any of these recommendations to the board. I keep them to myself. I read what the Deputy says about the applicant. Every time an appointment is made in certain parts of the country—not in all —I get letters. In some parts, very little interest is taken by applicants in seeking any kind of reference whatsoever. Every time an appointment is made it brings a crop of letters to me. They go into personal matters and tell me things about the successful applicant I do not want to know and that have no bearing on his application whatever. Every one of these disappointed people feels there is some connection between the Minister and the Board and the successful applicant. They make all sorts of allegations— that there is political pull and that other organisations, such as church organisations, can influence these minor appointments. They make reference to the grapevine in the Post Office in relation to these appointments.

The fact is that I do not know of any better system that can be devised. It is true Fianna Fáil Deputies make representations in relation to these appointments. It is true also that I give consideration to the representations made to me by Deputies, including Fianna Fáil Deputies. It is also true that many of the people I appoint are not recommended by Deputies or any member of the Oireachtas. They are the people who come through the system I have outlined and the appointment is made by me.

Deputy Tully seemed to think that because a Garda was appointed in County Meath to one of these offices, there was something sinister about it, some collusion between the successful applicant and myself. There is nothing unusual in the appointment of a Garda as subpostmaster. It is true that Gardaí are included in the list of people not eligible for appointment. That may seem strange. There is nothing to prevent a Garda from applying, and he can be appointed, provided the Board recommends him and on condition that he resigns from the Force. Deputy Tully seemed to think that the man resigned and then was appointed subpostmaster. Of course, that was not the order at all. First, he was appointed and then he resigned. I do not know whether I should burden the House with the history of this whole business. However, because it is a local office not far from where I live, I should like to explain that when the office became vacant, a number of people applied.

Would he be entitled to the Garda pension as well?

He is. That is one of the reasons why the Board would be in favour of appointing him, because of the security of the pension. One of the applicants lived in Deputy Dillon's constituency, County Monaghan. She was married to a sergeant in the Garda. She belonged to a local family and had a house in the village in which the office was vacant. She was the successful applicant, in the first instance. Her family were strong supporters of the Fine Gael Party, but they were very respectable, decent, hard-working people.

I do not like the conjunction "but".

Her husband, of course, had to resign to allow her to take the appointment. After three or four months, she decided not to continue the office any longer and resigned. The office was again advertised, and this Garda, who had applied in the first instance, renewed his application and was the successful applicant on this occasion. It is the height of nonsense for Deputy Tully to suggest that he was a Fianna Fáil supporter. He joined the Garda when the Force was established, and we know that the outlook of a man who entered the Force at that time would not be in accord with my outlook at that time. He would be on the opposite side. I do not know what his politics are and I do not want to know what they are or what his wife's politics are, either. He was not in the running on the first occasion. He got it on the second occasion because his circumstances had changed, as he had provided a new house in a central place in the village. The Board, in their wisdom, considered he was the person who should get it, recommended him and I appointed him. I would have wished, had I been a free agent, to give the office to the Captain's nephew who was also an applicant on the first occasion.

I do not want to delay the House any longer. Deputy Gilhawley referred to the appointment of a single man as an auxiliary postman. The single man I appointed had been employed for 12 months as a temporary postman, but because of a change in the postal organisation, he lost his employment. The post he was appointed to was one occupied by his uncle, who had been an auxiliary postman for over 40 years. I exercised my discretion to override the general Government direction and appoint that single man to that office. That is my explanation.

Several Deputies raised the question of pensions for auxiliary postmen. Has the Minister anything to say about that?

The employees of the Post Office, both auxiliary and established postmen, clerks and so on, have organisations of their own to negotiate their wages and conditions with the officers of the Department. They have conciliation and arbitration. They discuss the question of uniforms, pay, conditions of employment and so on. I am content to leave it that way.

They have not pressed for any pension for auxiliary postmen?

It would be difficult to provide pensions for them, in view of the method by which they are taken into the service and the age at which they are taken in.

Question: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration" put and declared lost.
Vote put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn