asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he is prepared to introduce a free telephone installation and rental system for old persons living on their own.
Ceisteanna—Questions, Oral Answers. - Telephone Service Tariffs.
98.
The answer is "No". Telephone service tariffs are at standard rates of general application to which no exception is made.
Would the Minister agree that such concession would not prove an undue burden to the taxpayer or on Departmental funds, particularly in the case of persons over 70 years of age, if it were done on a selective basis if necessary? The installation of a telephone is extremely costly. The rental is very costly. Calls are very rare and are on an emergency, life-line basis. Would the Minister consider this on a limited basis, such as in the case of free travel, free television licences, and so on? Would the consider the introduction of this concession for the persons I have referred to specifically—old persons living on their own? and proved to be living on their own? If a survey were carried out the Minister might not reject the idea so emphatically.
I do not think there is a necessity for the survey suggested by the Deputy because the 1966 census indicated that there were some number short of 23,000 persons in the country of 70 years of age and over living alone. The House will appreciate the huge cost that would be involved in providing a telephone service for that number of persons individually. I am surprised to hear the Deputy talking about a selective basis because the Minister for Social Welfare is for ever getting into trouble in regard to the means test in relation to old age pensions.
If you do it in the case of school books it should not break your heart to do it in this case.
It would appear that the Deputy is most anxious to introduce some other course that would enable him to kick up further ructions in the House.
I am trying to be helpful to the Minister. The Minister has said that there are 23,000 persons aged 70 and over living alone. I am not suggesting that telephones should be provided for every single one of these. If it were provided for 10 per cent of these, say, 2,000, phased over a ten-year period, I do not think it would upset the taxpayer enormously. I am grateful for small mercies.
I regret that I cannot share the Deputy's view about the upset to the taxpayer.
The telephone service is very profitable generally.
Generally, I do not accept that we should do this while there is a waiting list of persons anxious for telephones and willing to pay the rental. Having regard to our finances and to the number of technicians required for the installation of telephones at present and to deal with the general overhaul of the expanding telephone system, I do not think we have reached the stage where we can get around to doing what the Deputy asks for in this regard.