Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the delegates from ComReg and thank them for their comprehensive presentation. As Deputy Michael Colreavy pointed out, there are several fundamental issues that must be clarified regarding ComReg's role, activities and mandate. I was taken aback at the letter members of the committee received yesterday advising us - Members of the Oireachtas and legislators - that we are not permitted to ask certain questions, these being on matters which are of public interest. That is completely unacceptable. We should not leave the room until we get to the bottom of these important issues.

Only days after representatives of ComReg met this committee last January, they publicly announced their intention to pursue An Post through the courts, which is likely to result in a €12 million fine for An Post. I do not understand how the delegates could have attended that meeting and failed to advise the committee of its imminent intention in this regard.

I would like to know what the ComReg delegates think about informing the members of the joint comment of their actions in respect of a matter of significant public interest. If the ComReg delegates are not prepared to speak to the committee and share that information with members, will they tell me about sharing information with An Post? What communications strategy does ComReg have for its dealings on a day to day level with An Post?

A person from my background tries to fix problems before I pursue a significant public liability. We, the public, own An Post. We are the shareholder. Essentially, Mr. Alex Chisholm, the chairman of ComReg and his fellow commissioners have burdened me and the people I represent with a liability of €12 million. If whatDeputy Michael Colreavy states is true - if An Post has to pay the costs incurred by ComReg in its pursuit of An Post as well as its own costs in defending itself - there is a double liability for the State. If it is the situation that ComReg secures its revenue from An Post activity and at the same time pursues a legal case against An Post, that means An Post is paying on the double. The only people who seem to be coming out well on the other side are those in the Four Courts. They must rub their hands when they see the sight of ComReg. They see the open chequebook from An Post.

On the question of quality, I want the ComReg commissioners to share the benchmark they use in reaching a decision on a breach in the quality of service provided by An Post. By that I mean that the commissioners must have had some objective measure to establish the standard and I want them to share in public the precise measure they use vis-à-visother regulatory authorities across Europe.

There is another issue, which is a matter of public record. There was an article in the Irish Examiner on 12 October 2012, written by Aodhan O'Faolain. It outlines a case that the commissioners took on behalf of a citizen of this State with respect to a postal address. I suppose Mr. O'Brien is the responsible commissioner.