Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

Now that the Bill is before us, it is important we give it strong scrutiny. Will it go to a full committee of the House, rather than remain in here? The committees have not been established yet, so can we delay the legislation until that happens? It needs proper scrutiny in the committee rooms. Interest groups such as the Communication Workers Union could be brought in to update us on their opinion on the Bill. The Bill was dealt with in the Seanad in less than one month before Christmas, at a time when the outgoing Government's tenure was coming to an end. Committee and Report Stages took place within a week and debate only took place for a couple of hours each day. I do not believe it has had the scrutiny it deserves. It is very important that it has good scrutiny here. There has been an election, with a change of Government, and the present Administration needs to familiarise itself with this legislation and its implications and really think them through. I would like to see interested stakeholders invited in to consider the legislation at Oireachtas committee level and go through it bit by bit.

Most Deputies agree that what we have with An Post should be protected. We should adopt a precautionary principle with the legislation and do the minimum with it so An Post is protected as much as possible. It is a matter of going through the different parts of the Bill with a fine tooth comb. I realise the date for transposition has passed, but what will happen if we take another couple of months, to ensure the committees are up and running so the Bill may be given the fullest consideration possible? I would appreciate if the Government would consider that.

At one stage the Communications Workers Union, CWU, was asking whether there could be a moratorium as regards this legislation. I do not know whether that is possible, but there are many incidences where we do not transpose European Union directives for years, and we allow the Commission to take us all the way to the European Court of Justice, threatening fines and so on. This procedure can continue for many years. Is there an urgency in bringing forward this legislation? Would it not be better for us to take the necessary time to get it right?

The case being made by the Communications Workers Union was to the effect that there should be proper implementation of Recital 16, which states that the directive "is without prejudice to the competence of member states to regulate employment conditions in the postal services sector, which should not, however, lead to unfair competition". It says social considerations should be duly taken into account when preparing the opening of the postal market. The union, in particular, placed a strong emphasis on the social considerations and the need for these to be taken into account. That has been raised here on many occasions.

The CWU makes the point that we are in a different place now. It is not just that we have had an election, but so much has happened over the last couple of years both in this country and in other parts of the European Union. We should not just keep doing things on the basis that since this was the way something was started we must conclude as it began. We could change our minds and find ways to strengthen the legislation. We have a good postal service. I was looking at some of the statistics provided by the CWU, which show we have very competitive postage costs, the eighth lowest out of the 29 member states. Ireland is the seventh most efficient postal operator out of the 29. An Post operates with no State subvention or taxpayer support. Sometimes people complain about letters not being delivered, but in general our postal service is pretty good. It is remarkably when one thinks about what is involved from once a letter is posted, say, in Dublin to its arrival in Clonakilty, where Deputy Harrington is from, the next day. We have a remarkably good postal service and we do not want to lose that. We want to protect what we have. This legislation must be seen against the backdrop of the philosophy and ideology imposed by the European Union as regards the free market and competition. We need to examine these concepts again at EU level. The EU used to say that Ireland was doing great in respect of the economy, and now look what has happened. Now it wants to punish us. I believe the whole ideology that underpins much of the work of the EU and its member states needs to be re-examined and questioned. Obviously it is very important for the Labour Party as part of Government to reflect on this and what we stand for. What does the left stand for now? While we cannot go back to the time of the Soviet Union, it is fair to say that the policies of the right have failed our economies over the last few years.

All this emanates very much from a right wing perspective, namely, that the free market will somehow reach equilibrium over time. That was often said as regards the Irish housing market. I saw a documentary where the former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, in reply to a question, said it was the free market and that this would work itself out. We all know, however, that all these matters do not work themselves out. We cannot have free market conditions, with no intervention whatsoever, because we are human beings and we live in a social society. We must look at the legislation in this context.

Most significant, we should take precautions about this legislation and that is why it is very important to take our time and really scrutinise it. Many issues have been raised. The CWU has raised issues to do with ComReg's role in relation to this as the regulator. We frequently make reference here to the need for the Oireachtas not to reduce its role. Is there anything we can add to the legislation to ensure the regulator can be brought to this House and is answerable? Can we put a halt on the legislation at any stage and stop what the regulator is doing? That is one of the issues.

There is also the issue of proper licensing of private operators. The CWU argues that this legislation should ensure access by competitors should be below the level of the four mail centres. It is important to protect the type of public sector jobs we have. The public sector should be a benchmark for good working conditions and stable jobs. Those are good developments we have built up over the years and we should not be trying to introduce more temporary workers, poorer working conditions and so on. This is something which should be considered as part of this legislation.

See this speech in context