Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I listened carefully to what the Minister said. As I said earlier, I do not intend to push amendment No. 6 because it does not quite meet what I intended. I agree with the use of certain "weather" as opposed to "geographical" conditions. I now intend to bring forward a different amendment on Report Stage. This amendment will recognise the points made by the Minister and recognise some conditions will be relevant.

We need to go back to what the Minister said about the importance of primary legislation. This Bill is the primary legislation. Earlier, the Minister said to me that we should not try to undermine primary legislation by asking the Minister to regulate or interfere. Similarly, I hope he will accept that he has mentioned other directives and regulations. This is the primary legislation so we should not use the subsidiary position in order to defend it. I would like to deal with the issue of a universal service and to do that I suggest we look forward to section 18 of the Bill, page 20. It states:

A universal postal service is required -

(a) to provide a universal postal service ... subject to the interruption, suspension or restriction otherwise of all or any part of the universal postal service in cases of force majeure.

The point was made by Senator Brady earlier that issues will arise where it is above and beyond the ability of anybody to provide a service. I would like the Minister to explain the connection between these two sections. Section 18 is there to deal with the interruptions or suspensions that can happen for reasons which can be put down to force majeure. I recognise that force majeure is not defined in the Bill. Something else that is not defined in the Bill is "installation". I do not know what is meant by "installation". Perhaps my concerns, as indicated in amendment No. 6, could be dealt with by a definition of "installations" being included in the definitions section. If it simply means a road side letter box outside a front gate, that will not be a cause of concern. However, if it means it is something to which one will have to travel to another town or place to access post, I am opposed to it. As used in the Bill, there is no explanation for the word "installation". I imagine the Concise Oxford Dictionary would have ten pages on that word. I am not one to run to a dictionary just to support an argument, but am just concerned with the legalities. I do not know what is meant by "installation" and would like that clarified in the definitions of the Bill.

The Minister mentioned "islands" but I do not really understand what exactly he meant. What my amendment tried and failed to achieve could possibly be achieved by including the word "reasonable" to qualify the service, that it would do all that was "reasonable" and by replacing the word "geographical" with the word "weather". In other words, the service would do all that is "reasonable" and we would not expect it to deliver post daily in Inishturk if the boat only goes to Inishturk three days a week. However, I have concerns if the section means something else. I do not know what it means. If somebody wanted to establish himself in a hermitage on top of Croagh Patrick, I would not expect his post to be delivered to him every day. The issue is reasonableness. However, the Bill as is written leaves itself open to all sorts of interpretation.

We are talking about people who will be coming from outside to provide a cheap service at a cheap price. It will be a yellow pack job. If those people can find loopholes in the legislation to help them make more money, even if it means a diminution of the service, they will do that. I intend to return to amendment No. 6 on Report Stage so we can take on board the issues raised by Senator Brady and others and the issues raised by Senators O'Reilly and Coffey. We know what we mean and perhaps there is not a great difference between the Minister and us, but the Bill as written could be interpreted in a way that would not suit what the Minister requires. I will revisit that issue on Report Stage. On amendment No. 7, the Minister has not given us any comfort about the meaning of "installations". Is what he claims he is trying to achieve in section 16(1)(a) not covered in section 18 and, if it is not covered or if it is replicated, should we not be worried that it is left open to a loose interpretation?