Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 11 Mar 1970

Vol. 245 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 42: Posts and Telegraphs.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Lalor)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £750,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st day of March, 1970, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and of certain other services administered by that Office, and for payment of a grant-in-aid.

As Deputies are aware, the main Estimate for my Department amounting to £25,410,000 net was, in common with a number of others, passed without debate shortly before Christmas.

This Supplementary Estimate for £750,000 net is necessary to meet excess expenditure under a number of subheads and certain expenses under an additional subhead which were not foreseen when the original Estimate was prepared.

An extra £550,000 is required under subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances. Over £200,000 of this is needed for additional staff over and above those provided for in the original Estimate. These are mostly telephonists and engineering staff recruited to meet the rapidly expanding needs of the telecommunications services. The balance is required mainly for increased overtime expenditure following improvements in overtime and Sunday duty rates and for higher social welfare contributions.

Under subhead B, an extra £73,000 is needed mostly to meet higher rates of travelling and subsistence allowances and the cost of increased travelling on engineering work. There have also been some increases in provisions made for training courses, conferences etc.

Accommodation and buildings charges—subhead C—are expected to be higher than the original estimate by £163,000 due mainly to the acquisition of certain badly needed sites and premises which came on the market during the year.

The costs of conveying mail will be higher by an estimated £169,000 than the provision made under subhead D. This is due to a number of causes including arrangements for quicker clearance of airmail accounts, higher than estimated airmail traffic, steep increases in conveyance costs for foreign mail and higher conveyance costs generally.

The increase of £158,000 under subhead E for Postal and General Stores is due to the incidence of payment of arrears of Stationery Office and inter-state accounts, increased stationery requirements and higher costs, particularly for printing and for motor vehicle parts and repairs. There have also been some initial costs in connection with decimalisation.

An extra £12,000 is required under subhead I—Losses. It is difficult to estimate closely the charge under this subhead.

Under subhead J—Superannuation— £99,000 more is needed. The increase is due to improvements in pay and to the numbers of retirements and marriage gratuities being greater than expected.

The extra subhead L—Commissions and Special Inquiries—has been added to the Estimate to authorise payment of legal and other expenses in connection with the tribunal which is at present inquiring into the conflicting evidence about illegal moneylending arising out of the RTE "7-Days" programme on the subject. The provision of £5,000 is intended to cover payments likely to be made up to the end of the month. The bulk of the expenses in question will fall on next year's vote.

The items mentioned amount to a gross total of £1,229,000 but offsetting savings estimated at £244,000 are expected under subheads F and G. Moreover, further offsets amounting to £235,000 are expected from increased Appropriations-in-Aid. These together reduce the net amount required to £750,000.

I recommend the Supplementary Estimate to the House.

Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins

This Supplementary Estimate does not appear to be controversial. Many of the things which I want to deal with will have to be said on the general Estimate.

I do, however, welcome the extra money which has been allotted for wages and salaries. I have always considered that the wages and salaries paid to postmen and linesmen are particularly low. They always seem to work very hard and get very little remuneration for doing so. Now that I have mentioned postmen I should like to say that in this day and age I do not think postmen should be employed in a temporary capacity in positions which appear to be permanent. I suppose this ought to be said on the main Estimate but when money is being allotted for wages and salaries I feel I must take the opportunity of making the point here.

The increased allowance under subhead B is very reasonable because the cost of travelling and engineering work is going up all the time. The same goes for subhead C. Obviously, any sites acquired in the future, whether in town or out of town, will be more expensive than they were years ago.

I do not understand subhead D1. I take it that it is only concerned with the conveyence of mails and that it does not have anything to do with deliveries as such. Does subhead E deal with arrears to the Stationery Office or is the bulk of the money going to be used for repairs? One imagines that arrears of that kind would not be allowed to accumulate in a Government Department.

No information is given about the £12,000 losses under Subhead I. I appreciate the Minister's difficulty in finding it hard to estimate these losses.

I imagine that subhead J will be welcomed by all Deputies. It is important that all members of the staff get proper retirement pensions and marriage gratuities. From time to time I have had complaints about widows' pensions. I understand that the Department of Posts and Telegraphs decided to administer its own pension scheme for civil servants and their widows, and the widows of members of this Department were the last to get their increase in pension. When one widow rang up to inquire when the increased pension would be paid, she was answered very rudely. It is understandable that widows should be anxious about their pensions. After all, they have not been used to managing the financial affairs of the family and they will be more anxious than the person who has earned money all his life about paying the rent and rates. If there is any technical hitch this should be explained to them. They should not be fobbed off with a rude answer. I understand that they did finally receive their pension increase. I have always been interested in widows' pensions because for far too long not enough has been done for Civil Service widows. I think civil servants are the most abused people in our community. I am afraid they are blamed for doing a lot of things for which they are not responsible. I know they are a very conscientious and hard-working people and many of them kill themselves working. The least we can do is treat their widows fairly when they have passed away.

I suppose it would not be in order to discuss the cost of the Seven Days Tribunal in full but I notice a provision for it here of £5,000. I do not know how the Minister arrived at this figure. I am sure the cost of this tribunal will be gigantic, astronomical. I would think that it will cost well over £100,000. This £5,000 is intended to cover payments made up to the end of the month. I am afraid that when we have to foot the bill we will have to add some noughts to that £5,000. However, we cannot criticise it. We asked for this inquiry and we are getting it. I hope something useful will come of it and that the money will not be badly spent.

Mr. Desmond

I propose to confine my comments to the subheads outlined by the Minister. I will deal with the more detailed aspects when the main Estimate comes before the House. I support the Supplementary Estimate for £750,000 and I welcome the various allocations under the different subheads. An extra £550,000 is required for wages, salaries and allowances and the Minister pointed out that most of it is going to the telephonists and the engineering staffs. I agree that there is a need for greater expenditure in this area. With the expansion in the economy in the seventies there will be a demand for better telecommunication services in the State. This Supplementary Estimate pinpoints the fact that all the indications are that throughout the seventies there will be a very substantial demand for extensive postal, telephone, telegraph and telex services. Therefore, expenditure of this nature is not only desirable for those directly involved but necessary for the growth of a better public service.

Indeed, it is not often fully appreciated by the public at large that the Department of Posts and Telegraphs now employ in the region of 19,000 people in 100 different grades. This level of employment is comparable to that given by CIE. When we talk in terms of the 19,000 people involved in the 100 different grades, we appreciate the magnitude of the postal, telex, telephone and telegraph services and the growing importance of the Department.

I would urge the Minister that not only should there be increased expenditure but that it should be devoted increasingly to the telecommunication service because, despite the £50 million development programme which the Minister launched last year, there is still a grave shortage of telephone services throughout the country. It would be unfortunate if the growth of industry, particularly outside the Dublin area, and the development of a more efficient public service, were to be impeded by lack of capital in the first half of the 1970s. There was a growth of well over 7 per cent in the latter half of the sixties in the number of private subscribers and, when we consider what is likely to happen in the first half of the seventies, since all the indications are that the growth rate will be well up to 10 per cent, with a demand for an additional 125,000 telephones, we realise that the additional money voted under this subhead is necessary and desirable for the expansion of the telephone communication services.

I would urge the Minister to expedite the full development of these services. A debt of gratitude is due to the engineering and technician staffs in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs who have worked under intense pressure in the past decade. I have no doubt that during the seventies they will be very much involved in meeting the expanding needs of the country. This should be recorded in this House on this Estimate.

I should like to see more money being devoted, if it is available, towards the complete automation of the telephone services. At the moment, some eight out of every ten telephones are automatic. The service would be better and more efficient if we had a 100 per cent conversion to automation. That does not mean that there would not be a growing demand for telephone operators for the personal service which is inherent in any automated service. I should like to see it expanded as rapidly as possible and I should also like to see more money being set aside for the growing development of telex. There has been a phenomenal and almost explosive growth in this area in the past half decade, a growth rate, as the Minister indicated recently, in the region of 35 per cent. In the telex field we can certainly bring about a more rapid service to industry, to our public services and to the nation as a whole. This shows the growing strength of the country in the field of telecommunications. It is very welcome.

In respect of charges for accommodation and buildings I support the increased estimate of £163,000 which the Minister says is required for the acquisition of certain badly needed sites and premises which came on the market during the year. I submit to the Minister and the House that many of our public service buildings which are used as post offices are in dire need of an urgent face lift. I would point out to the Minister that in the constituency I represent, Dún Laoghaire/ Rathdown, with the rapid growth of the new services in the shipping field, with the growth in the car ferry service, with the growth of hotels and so on, the central post office does not meet the needs of the local population, or the growing tourist population, or the growing commuter population.

There could be considerable refurbishing and brightening up of many of our public postal premises. The Minister has pointed out that Donegal, Dungarvan, Listowel, Nenagh, Longford, Portlaoise and Mullingar, will get new post offices and improvements will be carried out in other centres but if we are to have an efficient national service, proper facilities should be provided for indoor staffs particularly in the sorting offices in areas where, with the growth in letter posting, there is need for greater expenditure.

The only other comment I would make is in respect of subhead L, commissions and special inquiries, under which the Minister must provide £5,000 to cover legal and other expenses up to the end of the month in connection with the RTE "7-Days" Tribunal. This could be classified as unwilling expenditure on the part of the Minister, and I do not think I am unduly going outside the scope of subhead L in saying that if the Government had listened fully to the Minister that £5,000 expenditure might not have been incurred. I would surmise that the total cost to the State in respect of Departments generally, not including the very substantial involvement of public officers, members of the Garda and so on, might add another £50,000 to the figure Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins suggested, so that this tribunal would cost not less than £150,000 by the time it concludes in another three or four weeks. It is well that it should be pointed out that for this exercise we are going through the taxpayers will be obliged to pay £150,000 at least in respect of legal and other costs.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Cunningham)

That does not arise here, to that extent at any rate.

Mr. Desmond

Having had the indulgence of the Chair I accept your ruling. When the main Estimate comes before the House we shall have a great many things to say to the Minister about conditions of employment of postal workers, the fact that there are a very large number of the 19,000 workers employed by the Department who could be classified as low-paid workers, in an area where the Minister could bring about the practical implementation of an effective incomes policy. We shall also have a good deal to say about management-labour relations. There has been a plethora of Supplementary Estimates coming before the House in the past fortnight and there are more to come involving the best part of £40 million. In the context of the budgetary system and of Estimates generally there should be a better way of meshing in these Supplementary Estimates. However, that would more appropriately be discussed under the heading of parliamentary reform and I hope we shall have that opportunity. In the meantime we do not begrudge the extra money being spent here and we support this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Bruton

I note that part of the wages and salaries subhead goes to officers seconded from the Department of Posts and Telegraphs to staff associations and so on. There is a certain difficulty here in that these officers are bound by very strict rules of the Department which affect their involvement in politics. This affects post office clerks in that if they attain a position in their staff association or, more particularly, in the trade union movement of which Civil Service Associations are a part, they are bound by very strict rules against any form of political involvement. I understand this may very seriously inhibit the activities of the incoming President of Congress, Mr. Maurice Cosgrave, who is a post office clerk. That is my information.

Mr. Desmond

It is not correct, so the Deputy need not worry.

Mr. Bruton

I am wrong?

Mr. Desmond

Yes.

Mr. Bruton

I withdraw what I said therefore. I was informed this might be the case. I understand, however, that such restrictions would not apply in the north where post office clerks have full political freedoms which possibly our people do not have. They can join parties and involve themselves in politics. Why can our post office clerks not have similar rights?

One of the grave injustices in regard to the wages and conditions of workers in the postal service is one that was mentioned by Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins, that is, the position of postmen who are temporary and remain temporary for a long period in their lives. Not only does this involve a cut in salary—I think there is a difference of about £2 a week—but they do not have the pension rights they would have if they were permanent. This is a very mean-minded attitude on the part of the Department in that they are not allowing these people to become permanent, thereby making marginal savings while causing considerable hardship and injustice.

Under subhead G there is reference to the steep increase in the conveyance costs of foreign mail. I would be interested if the Minister could elaborate on the type of increase incurred. Have these been inordinate increases which one does not anticipate from one year to the next or has the last year been marked by a particularly large increase in the conveyance costs of foreign mail?

Mr. Tully

Deputy Bruton was on the wrong track when he was talking about Mr. Maurice Cosgrave. He can be assured that when Mr. Cosgrave becomes President of Congress he can make any statement he considers necessary and the Government, no matter what Government it is, will not interfere. However, that is outside the Supplementary Estimate. Compared with other Supplementary Estimates which have come before this House in the last couple of weeks this sum is mere chicken feed. However, I am interested in one particular subhead, A—salaries, wages and allowances. The Minister states that over £200,000 of this is needed for additional staff over and above those provided for in the original Estimate and the balance is required mainly for increased overtime expenditure following improvements in overtime and Sunday duty rates and for higher social welfare contributions. It applies to everybody. It appears to be a very small amount per person, about £18 10s. Perhaps my arithmetic is wrong; I like to get figures right if at all possible.

Higher rates of travel and subsistence allowances apply not only to every Government Department but to every type of employment where travelling and subsistence are involved. Travel costs have gone sky high in the past couple of years and, in particular, over the past 12 months. Some of the Government's chickens are coming home to roost. It is costing the Government more now because they allowed costs to increase so steeply.

Accommodation and building charges under subhead C are expected to be higher than the original estimate by £163,000 due mainly to the acquisition of certain badly needed sites and premises which came on the market during the year. Could the Minister say if these include Ballsbridge? Has a site been found there? If he has a short list of those sites, perhaps, he would let us have it when replying as I would be interested to know what sites are concerned.

Perhaps the Minister could also say whether it is proposed to do anything about the dust in Sheriff Street? A site there was built on but as soon as the summer comes the situation there will be as bad as, or worse than it was in the past few years. I, like Deputy Bruton, am interested in the cost of conveying mail. It will be higher by an estimated £169,000 than the provision under subhead D. What percentage increase would that be? Perhaps the Minister would let us know the figure if he has it. An increase of £158,000 under subhead E for postal and general stores is due to the incidence of payments of arrears of stationery office and inter-state accounts, increased stationery requirements and higher costs particularly for printing and motor vehicle parts and repairs. This seems to be a hotch-potch. Would it not be possible to have it broken down more? If it has now been decided to bring up to date payment of arrears of this kind it is a good idea.

Those of us associated with local authorities find it very annoying that the Government are such bad payers. When we are due grants of any kind we do not get them until the 31st March when they are no longer any use to the Government because they want to have them paid out in that financial year. The result is that we pay interest on money we owe all over the year while the Government hold the money and could have paid it to us. If they are doing the same in their own interdepartmental payments I am sure unnecessary costs are building up and if this is a change for the better we cannot criticise it. I would be interested to know how the £12,000, a relatively small sum in a Supplementary Estimate of three-quarters of a million pounds, required under said subhead I for losses, arises. The Minister says it is difficult to estimate closely the charge on this subhead but could we have some general headings showing how this sum or the bulk of it arises, if the Minister has the information?

On subhead J, superannuation, £99,000 more is needed. It was stated that the increase is due to the improvement in pay to the staff and also to the numbers retiring and getting marriage gratuities being greater than expected. I suppose the improvements in pay are due to the £2 5s 0d or 4 per cent granted last year. There should be a pattern for retirements and it should be easy enough to estimate the number retiring during the year. I did quite a lot of this myself and I cannot understand how we would not know fairly accurately who was likely to retire. Marriages, I grant, are pretty hard to estimate.

I do not propose to deal with the Seven Days inquiry except to make the comment that the £5,000 provided under subhead L, is to cover payments likely to be made up to the end of the month. I would ask the Minister to confirm that that £5,000 does not represent anything like the expenditure that will have to be met on this inquiry up to the end of the month lest somebody would get the impression that we are getting the Seven Days inquiry up to this for a mere £5,000. I should like to know if the Minister has the information and what the amount will actually be or is likely to be?

Acting Chairman (Mr. Cunningham)

It does not arise on this.

Mr. Tully

It does, and if the Chair wishes I shall read the whole paragraph to show that it does.

Acting Chairman

To the extent of £5,000 only.

Mr. Tully

It says: "The provision of £5,000 is intended to cover payments likely to be made up to the end of the month. The bulk of the expenses in question will fall on next year's Vote." Since it is commented on I am entitled to ask——

Acting Chairman

Sin lá eile.

Mr. Tully

——how much of this has accrued or will accrue before the 31st March. Will the Minister confirm that this £5,000 does not represent anything like the cost of the inquiry so far? I fear the State will have to see an unlicensed moneylender if the inquiry goes on much longer.

The Chair may say that this is not in order but about four years ago the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs proudly announced that he proposed to change the colour of the post vans and letter boxes and also the name of the Department which he said would in future be known as "Post and Telecommunications". Has that proposal got any further?

Dr. O'Donovan

I wish to say a few words on the subhead L. for Commissions and Special Inquiries. This is an extraordinary place to have this subhead. The Minister's Department is not represented at this inquiry. It is an inquiry into Telefís Éireann and that subhead should have been put either into "miscellaneous expenses", for which there is a supplementary estimate, or into "law charges".

Acting Chairman

It is not included here and, therefore——

Dr. O'Donovan

But this is germane to the working of Parliament and very much so. This was foisted on the Minister as the most junior Minister. I do not say that in any disparaging way but the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs is normally regarded as the most junior of the Ministers.

Mr. Tully

The junior ministry.

Dr. O'Donovan

The fact is that "Commissions and Special Inquiries" was at one time a separate Vote. I was so astounded at finding this here that I went to the Library a while ago and looking up the matter, I found there is no Vote now for "Commissions and Special Inquiries." Of all the places, to foist this on the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs—it must be because he has a broad back.

Mr. Lalor

A big heart.

Dr. O'Donovan

It should not be here and even if it is here it should not be named "Commissions and Special Inquiries." It should be named "Inquiry into Telefís Éireann" or something like that. I do not like civil servants to go in for this type of generalisation; it always annoyed me when it happened and I always protested about it in the long years when I was in the Department of Finance. There is only one tribunal and it is a tribunal of inquiry into Telefís Éireann or some of the activities of Telefís Éireann and that is what it should be called. It may be that this title was copied by some official or somebody who likes precedent from the original Vote, "Commissions and Special Inquiries". and that that is how the title came. When a subhead is put into a Vote the intention is that it should be precise. It should say what it is supposed to say. Here we have "commissions" and "special inquiries" in the plural when, in fact, we have only one. I noticed my colleague, Deputy Tully, was so innocent that he thought this £5,000 might cover the cost.

Mr. Tully

I was not so innocent, but I think the Minister was trying to give someone the impression that it would cover the cost.

Dr. O'Donovan

The Minister did not fight his corner on this issue and I think he should have.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Lalor)

I am grateful to the House for the manner in which they accepted my request for the additional sum of £750,000 required. I would remind Deputy O'Donovan that there is on the records of the House a statement made by the Taoiseach saying that he treats all his Ministers equally. Certainly I accept the position of junior Minister from the point of view that I was the last Minister to be appointed to the Cabinet.

Some useful comments were made by Deputies on this Supplementary Estimate but they came up so speedily that I think I may have a little difficulty in trying to cover all the various items——

Mr. Tully

Perhaps the Minister would like to answer the points made in discussion of the main Estimate?

Mr. Lalor

We will have a reasonably sufficient amount of time to deal with general items on the main Estimate. Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins dealt with the various subheads as presented and perhaps from my point of view it would be as well for me to deal with the subject matter of the debate in the same way.

There was a general welcoming acceptance of the necessity for the increase in remuneration for staff. Deputy Tully did a quick sum in regard to the additional £200,000; he divided it by 19,000 and worked it out at £18 per head. It is clearly stated that the £200,000 is needed for staff additional to those provided for in the original Estimate and in fact we had an additional staff of 400. For the information of Deputy Tully that sum works out at £500 per head. Some of those people may not have been on the job for the entire year so that by working that out at £10 per week one does not come to a logical conclusion.

Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins, Deputies Tully and Bruton referred to the question of the non-established part-time postmen. This question is referred to annually; at the present time the claim for the introduction of a pension scheme for what we term full-time, non-established and part-time staffs has been made under the conciliation and arbitration scheme for the Civil Service and is presently before the general council. This claim was discussed at a meeting of the general council recently and, as the claim is the subject of arbitration proceedings, it is not usual for a Minister to make any public statement beyond saying that the claim has been made and is being considered.

Mr. Tully

They may be offered buttons, even brass buttons, and there is a danger of something like that happening from some of the offers that have recently come for non-pensionable people.

Mr. Lalor

The annual increase under this subhead indicates that so far as the Post Office is concerned buttons are not being offered.

Mr. Tully

Are the auxiliaries going to be included in the general scheme for non-pensionable State employees at present being considered? This is a very bad scheme and I should like the Minister to take a personal interest in it because otherwise it will be most unsatisfactory.

Mr. Lalor

The Deputy will appreciate that I do not wish to make any comment in the House that would influence the conciliation machinery.

Mr. Bruton

Could the Minister give us information regarding the distinction between full-time established and full-time non-established postmen?

Mr. Lalor

A full-time established postman means exactly what it says. An auxiliary postman is one who has a round that is not a 37½-hour work round as such. It is a postman who is not holding down a full-time post, he is quasi-permanent, he is pretty well established but has not a full-time job.

Mr. Tully

He usually spends so much time on the job that he has not time to do anything else. Therefore, as far as he is concerned it is his job and it is a fallacy to say it is not a full-time job. I know what the Minister means but most of these auxiliaries do not have any other job.

Mr. Lalor

It is difficult to accept that. I know it is the case with some auxiliary postmen but equally others have sidelines.

Mr. Tully

Sidelines, yes, but not a job.

Mr. Lalor

They are the owners of small farms——

Mr. Tully

The Minister for Lands will be delighted.

Mr. Lalor

We have been operating the idea put forward by the Minister for Lands for quite a number of years. Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins asked some questions regarding arrears under subhead E and this has also been mentioned by another Deputy. The amount specified was due to an account for a large amount of stationery supplies received too late for payment in the 1968-69 financial year. It was received actually just immediately prior to the current financial year and it had, therefore, to go in under the heading of arrears.

The question of losses under subhead I was raised. There are various kinds of losses. There is, for example, compensation for loss and damage to postal packets and there are losses sustained in the post office arising from burglaries and robberies. There was, unfortunately, an increase in the incidence of losses in the two years 1968-69 and 1969-70. I am afraid we have exceeded the standard, if I may put it that way, and it is the excess in the current year that is covered in this subhead.

Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins referred to the payment of Civil Service widows' pensions in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. All outstanding claims have now been dealt with. Since the Department employs about half of the overall numbers in the Civil Service it was obvious we would have more difficulties in this regard as compared with other Departments. We were deducting at source income tax which other Departments will deduct in the next year, but we have now readjusted that. I do not accept that widows were abused or unfairly treated. There was a mix-up because we were sticking to a regulation. We have overcome the difficulty now and I regret that there was any hold-up.

I do not think I need refer to Deputy Bruton's remarks about the seconding of post office staff to some of the trade unions. I think that matter was covered in asides between Deputy Desmond, Deputy Tully and Deputy Bruton. I personally have a great regard for the official mentioned and I regret that the actual name had to be raised here. I think Deputy Tully covered the point when he said that Deputy Bruton may have misunderstood the position. I shall say no more than that.

Deputy Tully said we should be able to estimate the number of retirements better than we do. The Deputy will appreciate that when there is an increase in salaries and wages the pension, on retirement, naturally goes up. The gratuity is increased. I can give a breakdown of the £99,000. The increased cost of pension payments due to more retirements than anticipated and to pay increases was £17,000. The increased cost of additional allowances was £62,000 and there was then the increased cost of marriage gratuities because of a substantial increase in the marriage rate which amounted to £33,000. Whether the lady members of the staff are becoming more marriageable or more attractive, I do not know. If they are I cannot claim any credit for that since it is the Civil Service Commission that recruits them. These figures of £17,000, £62,000 and £33,000, which amount to something over £100,000, were offset by a reduction in the cost of death gratuities and other miscellaneous items which amounted to £13,000. That is the breakdown Deputy Tully sought.

I accept the full implications of what Deputy Desmond said about the wisdom of spending as much money as possible on telephone development and more automation. Deputy Desmond paid tribute to the development that has taken place. I join with the Deputy in paying tribute to the staff; they have made remarkable advances over the past few years. We will, of course, continue to receive criticism of the telephone service, as such, but I think Deputies will accept that tremendous strides in telephone developments have taken place.

Deputy Tully—I hate to refer to it as a hardy annual—raised once more the question of dust in Sheriff Street. I suppose it is covered under some subheads.

Mr. Tully

Dust covers everything.

Mr. Lalor

One of the things which must be said is that I had not included any excess estimate for the clearing of dust from Sheriff Street. I cannot say there has been a falling off in the incidence of dust but there has been a falling off in the incidence of complaint. I understand certain steps were taken in an effort to minimise the volume of dust. Deputy Tully is forever reminding me of the fact that we talk about dust and then forget about it until the following year's Estimate. I do not accept that. I have taken great interest in the possibility of getting rid of dust from this place. I come back now with a hardy annual by saying that the coal will be taken away and with it the creation of dust will be minimised.

Mr. Tully

The windows were closed but that is not all right during the summer. It will be hot then and there will be the same trouble again unless something is done. The coal will be taken away eventually but there are other causes of dust.

Mr. Lalor

The postbags create dust. The bags are being cleaned twice as often as they were before. These are major steps in the elimination of dust. There are people who say that the officials in the sorting office could not raise dust. They are raising dust, which is a proof of their efficiency.

Mr. Tully

These men work very, very hard.

Mr. Lalor

As Deputy Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins says there is no civil servant as much maligned as the civil servant within the post office. He is meeting the public more often and his work affects the public more often than that of any other civil servant. Letters are written to the paper about these men and various complaints are voiced. Because of this, I have taken more than a little interest in the question of the extraction of dust from the Sheriff Street office. I will continue to do this by taking all remedial action I can in relation to that building. It is a fine premises but post and postbags are things which bring in dust. I was glad that the Deputy remarked on the improved image. I hope that Deputies who have seen the "new look" postal vans have been pleased with them. Deputy Tully spoke in previous Estimate debates about the necessity for a change from the drab green. I think the marigold and white, with the new monogram designed by the Kilkenny design workshops, is very nice.

Mr. Tully

What about the name?

Mr. Lalor

In fact, it might be as well to leave that until we are talking about the main Estimate. There is a lot in the name. We get back to the Devlin Report in this regard. I have covered most points now.

Mr. Tully

Has the Minister a list of the new sites which have been bought? Is Ballsbridge included in it?

Mr. Lalor

No. Deputy Desmond referred to Dún Laoghaire. I spoke to him on that, explaining the difficulties. We will have a new sorting office there. Ballsbridge is proving difficult. It is a case of finding an alternative site.

Mr. Tully

It will be very difficult to get a place at any price shortly. Sites are becoming more expensive daily.

Mr. Lalor

We have been concentrating on finding a site in the immediate Ballsbridge area. It is difficult, even if we went to a fringe area of Ballsbridge and readjusted the postal routes. In fact, even at a price, we are finding it difficult to locate a site, and price is a factor which must be taken into consideration by us.

Mr. Tully

Could the Minister take some of the services out of the existing premises? They could then be used for people who do not wish to go very far. It is unfair to continue using the premises as they are.

Mr. Lalor

We talked with the staff about moving down to our old premises in Pearse Street. The staff were not in favour of this move. No doubt some of them live in the Ballsbridge area. We moved out of Pearse Street to go into Sheriff Street.

Mr. Tully

Why not get a site close at hand and build to accommodate most of the services? Eventually something like that must be done.

Mr. Lalor

We have located what we feel would be a suitable site reasonably convenient to Ballsbridge.

Mr. Tully

We heard about a suitable site last year.

Mr. Lalor

We lost that one and we are after a different site at the moment. We are trying to negotiate for it. It is a case of "many a slip between the cup and the lip". I myself was dealing with this particular problem last year. Deputy Tully raised this on the Estimates by way of Parliamentary Question. It is one of the problems he often raises. Deputy Tully also stresses the need for pensions for auxiliary postmen, which is one of his strongest points.

I wish to thank the House for accepting this Supplementary Estimate so graciously and to say that I appreciate their comments.

Question put and agreed to.

Votes 45, 46, 8 and 42 reported and agreed to.

The Dáil adjourned at 7.50 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 12th March, 1970.