Mr. Kevin O'Brien:

I will be very brief. Deputy Stanley asked if we could describe how we implement the price gap. The price gap was required under legislation and has been in place since 2014. It is built basically from information provided by An Post. It is something of a mathematical equation. With the An Post volume decline estimate, we sought the 2% per annum efficiency which I mentioned. We had An Post's costs estimates and we put these basically into the model. We also allowed for profitability on universal service, so there is a margin to be gained. Based on the information we had in 2014, we put a model in place. As I said in my presentation, it was based on information from An Post, and An Post indicated at the time that it was happy with that. I would indicate that it was a ceiling on price, so An Post was free to increase prices to whatever level it wanted within an overall basket. There was a sub-control of the stamped and metered price to protect SMEs because under the Act we were required to protect SMEs. That was the model in place required by legislation, which we put in place.

It significantly reduced the losses in USO in relation to revenue covered by the price cap. As Mr. Pigot has pointed out, there are separate losses to do with the international inbound mail issue. ComReg has performed as required by the legislation in all cases, according to its remit, so any suggestion that we have been negligent is totally incorrect in that regard.