Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)

The European Commission published a proposal for the third postal directive last year. It proposed that the postal sectors across the European Union should be fully opened to competition. The proposal has been debated at the European Parliament and European Council. Political agreement was reached at Council level on 1 October last that the deadline for the full opening of the market would be 1 January 2011 for most EU countries, including Ireland. As Ireland has fully implemented the first two European directives, the liberalisation of our postal sector has commenced. The reserved area, the part of the market confined to An Post, has been gradually reduced since 2000. To date, Ireland has adopted a light-handed and pro-competition approach to regulating the postal market, thereby maximising the number of postal operators entering the market. In the light of the benefits that competition brings, there is no reason to suggest Ireland should depart from such an approach.

I do not doubt that liberalisation and the complete removal of the legal barrier to entry will encourage new entrants into the postal market. Other sectors which have liberalised as a result of developments at EU level such as the telecommunications market have resulted in greater consumer choice and reduced prices. I anticipate that the liberalisation of the postal market will have similarly positive effects for Irish consumers.

Issues that will be important for Ireland in the context of a fully liberalised market will include the protection of the universal service and the continued viability of An Post in the face of open competition. The draft directive proposes that the existing levels of universal service be maintained, which means that there will be one clearance and one delivery to every address in Ireland no less than five days a week. If it can be established that meeting the universal service obligation constitutes a net cost, the draft directive sets out a number of options from which member states may choose, including the establishment of a compensation fund, the procurement of the universal service by a member state, the provision of compensation from public funds or the requirement that the universal service provider bear the full cost of the obligation from its resources. No decision has been made on how the cost, if any, of the obligation will be met in the absence of the reserved area. Many international studies suggest that meeting the obligation may not entail a net cost.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

To inform Government in its decisions on options relating to the USO and other matters, I intend, before the directive is transposed, to conduct a public consultation seeking the views of all stakeholders in these and other matters arising from the directive.

See this speech in context