asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if amending legislation is planned to cope with the problem of inability to comply with statutory time limits arising out of the postal dispute and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Postal Dispute.
3.
No such legislation is planned at present.
Has the Minister given any thought to the difficulties that may arise in this area and has he any plans to cope with them?
A check has been made with the various Departments. They have informed me that there is no need for amending legislation at present. If a change should arise to necessitate legislation, the matter will be considered.
Is the Minister aware of the difficulties, particularly in rural areas, in regard to the statutory limit for lodging planning appeals?
I have checked with the Department of the Environment and they say that there is no need at present for amending legislation.
Is the Minister aware that in regard to planning decisions there is a statutory provision under section 26 of the 1973 Act whereby a third party has to lodge his appeal within 21 days and the applicant within a month? How does the Minister suggest that people in rural areas can do this at present?
I am sure that the Department of the Environment are well aware of the situation. They are the experts in this matter and if they tell me that there is no need for legislation then there is no need for it.
With all due respect to the Department of the Environment in their ivory tower, I am aware that there is a problem and people have come to me in connection with the lodging of planning appeals. Will the Minister accept that there is a problem in that area and in other areas and will he do something about it if he will not solve the postal dispute?
I have given the Deputy the answer which I received from the Department of the Environment.
Is it the Minister's attitude that there is no problem?
Is the Minister of the opinion that some statutory complications may arise in relation to the European elections and the local elections whereby citizens, including members of the Garda and the Army will not be in a position to exercise their postal voting entitlements? In that context, is statutory provision being considered by the Department of the Environment?
I am sure that the Department of the Environment have considered all aspects of this matter. They tell me that there is no need for amending legislation at present. If there was a need for such legislation the matter would be considered.
As it is now ten weeks since the dispute started, can the Minister tell us if there are hopes of a settlement?
That is a separate question.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Is the Minister satisfied that it will be possible to proceed with the European and local elections on 7 June if the postal strike is not settled beforehand?
That is not the question I was asked. I have replied to the question.
That is a question for another Minister.
(Interruptions.)
4.
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the estimated loss in revenue caused by the postal strike to date.
It is estimated that to date the present strike has resulted in a loss of £11 million in postal and telecommunications revenue.
Has the Minister an estimate of the loss to tourism and industry?
That is a separate question.
Does that mean that the strike is costing the Post Office £1.1 million per week?
I informed the Deputy that the loss to date in postal and telecommunications revenue is £11 million.
For every week that the dispute continues will the postal revenue loss be £1.1 million?
I am sure the Deputy is capable of doing his sums. If that is the way he has worked it out then that must be the position.
Can the Minister give a breakdown of the figure?
The figure of £11 million represents the revenue which it is estimated would have accrued to the Department since the strike began.
Is that the breakdown of what has been lost only by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs?
In relation to postal and telecommunications revenue.
Is that the only aspect included in the figure?
Yes.
How much would it cost to concede in full the claim of the postal workers?
That has no bearing on the question.
That is a different question. The Chair will not permit the escalation of the question. I am calling Question No. 5.
(Interruptions.)
Order.
Is it in order to inquire whether the figure quoted is in reply to the question as it is phrased, which is, the estimated loss in revenue caused by the postal strike, which does not only relate to the Minister's Department? In other words the question clearly sought an estimate of the total loss of revenue.
That question was put to the Taoiseach.
Order. I am calling Question No. 5.
The question put down to the Taoiseach clearly relates to Government revenue as a whole. Is it in order for the Taoiseach to pass it to the Minister and for the Minister to say——
The Deputy should consult with his colleague as to whether this question was put down to the Taoiseach.
I put the question down to the Taoiseach.
Questions are frequently transferred from one Minister to another.
When a question about Government revenue as a whole is transferred to a particular Minister and he then replies giving figures for his Department only, does that not undo the whole purpose of Question Time?
That argument is not in order now.
What is the total revenue loss?
Order.
What is the total revenue loss?
Will the Deputy please resume his seat?