Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I thank the Minister of State for his informative outline. However, where is the conflict in this regard? When examining the motion tabled by Fine Gael, I cannot discern the point at which his statement is in conflict with its objectives or the reason it is necessary to be confrontational on this issue by tabling an amendment that rejects in it entirety the original motion.

Ireland has an extremely low volume of mail per head of population when compared to other countries of similar affluence, which is a reflection on the nature of the service. The Government's amendment acknowledges the need for "a nationwide postal service which ensures all customers ... have access to a high quality, competitively priced postal service". The issue of next-day delivery and its associated criteria has been debated and is a key measure of such a competitive and quality service. An Post has been assisted by the framework that is provided for in European law, which recognises the concept of the universal service of general economic interest. Moreover, the recent European Court of Justice judgment on the contract for the distribution of welfare payments through post offices is a welcome development. Consequently, the framework is in place and the issue is really one of competence and management domestically. No prohibitions or restrictions constrain the Government or An Post from providing an efficient service.

I refer to the criteria regarding next-day delivery. While the Commission for Communications Regulation standard is set at 94%, it appears that An Post is working to a different standard. Why have an independent regulator unless one works to its standard? The will does not appear to exist to complete the drive to achieve a rate of 94%. While these are not criticisms as such of An Post, its management or workers, it is incumbent on Members of the Oireachtas to point out continually the need for greater efficiencies, better management and competence at the different levels, as well as better direction and regulation on the Government's part.

Some post office closures are inevitable. However, the nature of the service of general economic interest provided by An Post is a factor that must be taken into account. I agree fully with the comments made by Senator Alex White in this regard. It is clear that the European Union does not perceive competition to be the be all and end all in such areas. It gives recognition to the concept of a service of general economic interest and An Post falls within such a category.

While the Minister of State's contribution was informative, it does not sustain the amendment to the Fine Gael motion that has been tabled. I have heard nothing in the debate thus far or from the Minister of State that cuts across Fine Gael's call on the Government for the two items listed in the motion. The first is "to seek an improved timescale from management in An Post for delivery services and to prioritise plans for better organisation of collections, sorting and delivery services". I cannot see how there could be a difficulty in acquiescing to this motion. The second item calls on the Government "to seek assurances from An Post management that essential services provided by post offices nationwide are maintained". There are no grounds for rejecting this Fine Gael motion.