Joe O'Reilly (Fine Gael)

A community is losing another vital service following the amalgamation of schools and the closure of the Garda station, which is all very depressing and brings back memories of the 1950s. There is a risk that this legislation will lead to the closure of small local postal outlets as a consequence of opening up to competition. While this is happening already to an extent, at least there is control and a democratic input. I am very concerned about that prospect. The Minister should consider introducing amendments on Committee State to offer protection in the legislation. In Germany 21,000 full-time jobs and 12,000 part-time jobs were lost following the introduction of competition, while 11,000 jobs were lost in Japan. This means we will suffer job losses at possibly the worst time. All of us would gladly spend every waking hour trying to encourage job creation and the risk to jobs represents another difficulty with the legislation. While we have no alternative but to accept the directive, we need to build in as many safeguards as we can and - to use that awful expression - have something of an Irish solution to the problem. If we do not, we run the risk of losing small post offices and jobs and increasing the cost of postal services.

Through a levy, private operators will, rightly, subvent the universal service provider. I ask the Minister to clarify if European law precludes State subvention at all times. If it does not prevent us availing of the option of State subsidisation, we should not rule it out. If the levy does not suffice and there is a risk posed to a good quality universal service, we should have that option, even though it is the last thing we would want to avail of. Just as we frequently talk about job creation and cost competitiveness, we also talk about the need to reduce the cost of public services. Subvention would be the last option, but I would not be opposed to providing for such an option in the legislation.

The legislation will give the green light to the introduction of postal codes, to which I have no objection. While modern reasoning suggests they are more efficient, I would like to be assured that they will in no way diminish, confuse or make it difficult to deliver post efficiently.

Regarding postal codes, I am concerned about the complexities of addresses and local idioms in isolated rural areas that might prevent the efficient delivery of post. Some years ago we used to complain about the speed of An Post deliveries. However, An Post has upped its game and been an unqualified success. The great work it has done in increasing the speed of delivery and ensuring next day delivery should be acknowledged. I am concerned, however, that its success could be damaged in certain areas by the introduction of postal codes. I would like the Minister to outline his Department's approach to the issue. I could spend the last three minutes of my time by asking how complex addresses, including Gaelic versions, local idioms and distinctions, will be dealt with. I am concerned that issues such as holiday homes could turn into an administrative nightmare. I hope we can return to these points on Committee Stage when we will discuss any amendments the Government or we will table in keeping with our role in Parliament. First, I am concerned about the universal service provision, that it will be maintained evenly across the country and at no extra cost to consumers. It should not place a burden on the ordinary consumer and on small and medium enterprise as a result of cherrypicking and so forth. Second, I am concerned that we do not lose local postal outlets through their random closure as a consequence of this. There is a risk of unevenness of service in certain areas and a disparity between regions due to different service providers in different regions. I am anxious to maintain evenness in that regard.

I am also concerned about jobs. All the empirical findings from Germany, Japan and other states show that no state has achieved this objective without a loss of jobs. That is horrendous, frightening and a great concern. There is also the issue of the general quality of service and its cost. While I acknowledge there has been a move to information technology, there is still a core number of people who use the traditional way of communicating by letter or parcel. They have that right, regardless of where they live, their means or their level of education. If we can protect that, I have no difficulty with the legislation.