Vol. 399 No. 4
11 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Communications if his attention has been drawn to the recent call made by the Office of the Ombudsman for the introduction of a customers' charter for customers of Telecom Éireann; if he will consider introducing legislation to provide for such a charter; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The proposal made by the Office of the Ombudsman was for the voluntary publication of a code of practice by Telecom Éireann. There is no requirement for legislation to provide for this; it is entirely a matter between Telecom Éireann and the Office of the Ombudsman.
I do not accept the Minister's answer. If he feels it is a matter requiring or deserving of legislation does he not agree that one option is that he could initiate the necessary legislation to impose the will of the House on the matter? On the other hand, if the Minister stands by his view that the legislation is not necessary, has he taken any steps to let his view on whether it would be desirable for BTE to have a customer's charter as suggested by the Ombudsman be known?
The experience here with voluntary codes of practice has worked very well. The ESB have one and from my days in the Department of Energy I remember it worked well. British Telecom have one and there has been some consultation to see how effective it has been. They say it is difficult to produce evidence that codes of practice improved customer relations on the ground, and really what we have to do is try to improve customer relations. It also appeared that in some respects such codes can themselves be a cause of contention. However, I accept that the rights of the customer need to be protected at all times. It is a matter for the board of Telecom, and if it is the considered view of the House — I will be interested to hear the observations on it — I will go back to the board of Telecom and tell them the view expressed in this House.
Can I take it that to date the Minister has not responded to what the Ombudsman suggested would be a useful device?
It is not a question of not responding. We have had contact with BTE in relation to this issue and the response is as I have just given it to the House — they have been in touch with the organisation in the UK who have experience of this. On the whole I believe the type of operation and voluntary code of practice has worked very well in the ESB and I think there is merit in having it in Telecom. I will be delighted to pass on the views of this House to BTE.
The Minister has been very reactive rather than proactive in this case. Will he not accept that BTE's customers feel very aggrieved? Whether they are right or wrong, many of them feel they have been robbed by BTE, for the simple reason that they have no independent check of the meters at the exchange, unlike the ESB who provide meters in the home. Will the Minister not accept that there is an issue here to be addressed as highlighted by the Ombudsman, and that he should take a more positive role?
The main burden of the complaints with the Ombudsman system has been in relation to the accuracy of the billing. That matter is being rapidly addressed by BTE through the introduction of their individual bills where you can have each call made from your phone identified, and that service will become available throughout the country. That is not to say there are not other issues that would arise where they might need a code of practice. On the whole, relations between BTE and their customers are good. Their service is being extended throughout the country and we have one of the most up to date telephone systems in the world. I make no political point on this, both sides of the House were responsible for that. The service has improved dramatically and we should be very proud of it.
Let me make a point about new customers of BTE. It has taken from 18 months to two years to give them the first bill. I have never been able to get a satisfactory explanation for that. Why do these machines not show up in the first month the bills of those new customers? There seems to be something wrong with BTE's billing system. Certainly it is not explained to my satisfaction, and it does not appear to be explained to the satisfaction of the Ombudsman. Does the Minister not feel he has a duty to examine this more carefully and positively and come up with a process to deal with it?
It has been examined, but I value this exchange in the House; I will take note of it and go back to BTE in relation to the points that have been made.
Is the Minister aware that in Dublin not only is there dissatisfaction with the billing system but there is widespread dissatisfaction with BTE's inability to communicate with their customers? Is he aware that, for example, many people moving into new housing estates in Dublin find it virtually impossible to discover from BTE what their work schedules are and by what date phones are likely to be supplied? Will he also bring that problem to the attention of the board? Will he confirm that he agrees that well organised State or semi-State bodies should have a work schedule by which they can indicate to applicants for custom that if an application for a phone is made on a particular date, a phone will be available? Could the Minister also ascertain what has happened to their much vaunted promise of some five years ago that within a matter of two or three years in Dublin telephones would be available on demand? In many parts of Dublin that is very far from reality.
On the whole Telecom have done a superb job. I recall, as will other Deputies who have spent a number of years here, that at political clinics in the mid-seventies at least 50 per cent of the people who attended were trying to speed up telephone connections.
I cannot go back that far. I will take the Minister's word for it.
That has all changed because Telecom have done such a superb job. There may be pockets of problems——
The problem is growing again.
It is an interesting feature of the European Presidency that groups from abroad comment on how advanced the telephone system is now compared with the period of our last Presidency. I do not make a political point. I say that with respect to the achievements of Telecom Éireann. If Deputy Shatter gives me the details of problems in particular areas, I will be delighted to have them examined by Telecom.
The Minister may be confused between the technological work of Telecom Éireann and their billing system. I agree they have a very good system but some people have been hassled so much by getting incorrect bills that they have had to have the telephone disconnected. Has the Minister come across this in his constituency work? I certainly have. The Ombudsman has told us within the past few days that he is some 18 months behind in dealing with complaints about Telecom. Deputies can wait even longer to get a result. Surely the Minister cannot regard that as satisfactory.
The Deputy has made his point eloquently and adequately.
Is the Minister aware that there is a major breakdown by Telecom in dealing with customers' complaints?
If the Deputy can give me details of individual cases I will bring them to the attention of Telecom Éireann. The main complaint is in relation to the accuracy of bills. That problem is being overcome on a nationwide basis by making available to subscribers an itemised bill. That is a major step forward. It is in response to the continuing reports of the Ombudsman that Telecom have taken on the task of introducing this service for their customers. They are aware of the need to meet the legitimate concerns of customers. It is costing in the region of £20 million to install this individual billing system on a nationwide basis.
