Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very aware of it. A sum of €332 million was calculated in control savings last year based on the actions of that section of the Department. The staff do tremendous work, but it would be interesting to examine the level and frequency of fraud in respect of payments collected by electronic means and through banks, payments collected in the major post offices and sub-post offices. I suspect that any such analysis would quickly show that there was far less fraud taking place in respect of payments collected in sub-post offices. The postmaster or postmistress knows the individuals who come to the sub-post office to collect these payments. Given the focus on fraud - it is correct that there should be such a focus - the sub-post office network has an important role to play, a role that has been ignored up to now. Person-to-person payments were reintroduced by the Minister's predecessor, former Deputy Mary Hanafin, because of the level of fraud perpetrated through the electronic payments system.

There is another matter that is ignored, even though it could help to improve efficiency not only in the Minister's Department but also in others. It is far more efficient to process an application submitted online and many Government agencies, including the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport in respect of driving licences, are trying to incentivise people to submit their applications in this way. However, there is a problem with a cohort of people who are unable to use these online systems. In the case of social welfare, I suspect that the vast majority of applications are made on hard copy. If the Department gave postmasters and postmistresses a role in assisting with the submission of applications online, it would streamline and speed up the processing of these applications within the Department and ensure all of the required documentation was provided from the start, reducing the need for follow-up queries. Giving postmasters and postmistresses a direct role in that regard would make it far more difficult for another operator to compete directly with the local post office network in providing that service.

That brings me to the excuse made, that it must be open to everybody owing to EU competition rules. The Minister could set very simple criteria which would benefit the delivery of the service, one of which could be that the operator have a minimum number of outlets and that they be located not just in local towns but also serve rural communities. Many of the major retailers will be unable to compete on that level. The operator could be required to assist people in filling in forms and submitting them online. Many operators would be unable to deal with this.

Another matter that is ignored is that postmasters and postmistresses must sign the Official Secrets Act. Many of the other service providers being proposed would not have to do this. We are talking about very personal and private information and people do not necessarily wish it to be known that they are in receipt of a social assistance payment. Based on the level of the social assistance payment they receive, one can quickly calculate their other income. That issue must be taken into account in any provision made regarding the roll-out of a payments collection function to other service providers.

These issues have been ignored to a great extent by the Department to date.

I ask and urge the Minister to reconsider those issues and consider the amendment that has been put forward here.