Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State and the comments he made during his speech. I am glad we are having this debate which is not before time, having been called for some months ago. The situation in An Post is not a happy one. I do not propose to take one side or the other. However, I should declare an interest in that I have a relationship with An Post as a member of the philatelic advisory committee which advises on the selection of commemorative stamps. Obviously that brings me into some contact with some of those in management in An Post.

The situation of our postal service is reminiscent of attitudes to the railways 30 years ago. People thought that road transport was taking over and that the railways were on the way out. One might argue that modern systems of communications such as e-mail, various types of competitive parcel services, mobile phones and so on make the postal service a thing of the past. I do not believe that is the case. There will be a need for a postal service into the foreseeable future. Just because there are other technologies available does not mean people no longer write letters or that documentation will not continue to come through the door. It is one of the public services which is most valued by the general public.

In rural Ireland in particular, the daily visit by the postman is a form of communication with the relatively isolated farmhouse or bungalow. That service, though costly, needs to be maintained. Anyone who visits one of our large post offices, particularly in rural Ireland, will be aware of long queues at certain times of the week and barely enough staff to cope. Given the number of tasks the post office undertakes in terms of paying bills, banking, payment of child benefit, pensions and so on it has become considerably diversified.

I regret deeply what is obvious to anybody who works in An Post, namely, that morale is not what it should be. There is much unhappiness and, unfortunately, much conflict on a large number of issues. It is demoralising and a bad sign if national wage agreements or programme increases cannot be paid. It means something is badly wrong and needs to be put right. Generally speaking such pay increases do not give the sun, moon and stars but are reasonably modest increases. One cannot expect public service workers to accept that position, as that should not be the case. The Government's instinct and advice is that it should stand back from these issues. I am not sure that is always the best approach. One of the reasons the Taoiseach is Taoiseach is that in the late 1980s and early 1990s he adopted a hands-on attitude to many difficult disputes and helped resolve them. To stand back in the event of a major problem is not necessarily the best advice.

I wish to address two or three specific problems, the first being automation of the post office network. In his contribution the Minister of State categorically stated:

Automation of the post office network has also been completed. The automated network accounts for more than 95% of counter business while 475 non-automated offices undertake 5% of business. This figure clearly illustrates the level of business transacted by individual non-automated offices.

There is no recognition of the extent to which that is a self-fulfilling prophesy. Of course an automated office carries out much more business than a non-automated office. What does one expect? I am aware of non-automated offices in villages which are seven or more miles from large towns which are anxious to be automated to enable them to provide services so customers do not have to drive into the middle of a town where there is traffic congestion. I do not like the idea of a two-tier postal service where the majority of post offices are to be automated and given the opportunities to thrive and survive. It is like saying that a branch line of a railway will not be maintained any longer. If such an approach is taken, after a while pressures will force it in the direction of closure. We have never been given any figures. I ask the Minister of State in his reply to give the House the information. What is the actual cost of automation? Is it really all that expensive to install a computer in a post office? As a result of making representations to post office management, I have found they are absolutely adamant. Like the most extreme Unionist politician in the hearing of any case, they will not give an inch. The dogmatic attitude of "it has been completed" is quite unfair to post offices which perform a very important economic, social and, dare I say, environmental function in the sense that the service could prevent people making unnecessary journeys to town. I am extremely unhappy about the position.

The post office is in possession of some fine properties in towns and cities around the country. Efforts have been made to realise the value of these properties and to push an office from a fine building into a pokey corner of a supermarket where there is not room for people to work. If at all possible, post offices should be able to operate in their original building and where necessary use other parts of the building for other functions. For example, Tipperary railway station is a fine, two-storey building. One room is necessary for railway business and the others have been turned into incubation units for various kinds of business. I recommend such an approach to the post office. As mentioned by Senator Bannon, we will be meeting post office representatives next week. It is important we encourage both sides to seek negotiated and agreed solutions to their difficulties.

The importance of the postal service should not be in doubt. The British Government has given a subsidy of £140 million to maintain rural post offices. I acknowledge it is a much bigger country with a larger population. It took a long time to recognise that the railways needed to be subsidised. It may be that certain vital public services require a small element of subsidisation and if so, the Government should not shrink from that.