Seanad debates

Tuesday, 26 July 2011

Communications Regulation (Postal Services) Bill 2010 [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil]: Report and Final Stages

 

7:00 pm

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)

I will speak about amendment No. 88 in group 19 which deals with the national postcode system. I propose that we not support the area postcode system decided on by the former Minister with responsibility for communications in the previous Government, Eamon Ryan. As noted, Fine Gael and the Labour Party supported a distinctly more unambiguous postcode system in their recent manifestos. For example, the Fine Gael manifesto read: "Fine Gael will introduce a new postcode system that works on the principle of codes unique to the location of buildings as opposed to the Government's current plan for an area code system". Why has the Government altered its previous position on this matter? Why is the provision included in the Bill much broader in terms of who the system will benefit?

The system of postcodes which the Government intends to introduce is based on 1960s technology, pre-scanners, pre-GPS and pre-satnav systems. A system of postcodes has been in the pipeline for many years. However, it was always thought by the general public and An Post that postcodes were unnecessary. An Post always stated it did not need postcodes to do its job, even though it now appears to have changed its stance on the subject. The truth of the matter is that such a system would be of no benefit to rural communities. Practically 40% of the population is rural based. Ireland has the largest percentage of rural dwellers in Europe. The reason such a system would be of no benefit is that in many rural areas there are no street names, let alone house names. Without this information postcodes would lead the postman to a general area or townland in which there may be up to 50 properties. He would still have to wander around and ask for directions.

The Bill proposes that additional characters be added to the postcode for selected organisations such as the Revenue Commissions and the Department of Social Protection in order to find the correct properties. However, the owner of a property who might have to dial 999 to call for an ambulance would not be in possession of a postcode to unambiguously identify his or her house. Neither would a courier, a census enumerator or even a political canvasser be able to use the postcode to identify individual properties.

A report by PA Consulting released in 2008 on the website of the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources estimated the cost of implementing this inefficient postal system. It was predicted that the total cost would be approximately €45 million. I, therefore, ask the Government to reassess its options. There is state-of-the-art technology available which allocates codes to individual buildings. This is the technology developed by an Irish company based in Cork and it is so advanced that it has recently been incorporated by a leading international company, Garmin. I propose that the Government invest in implementing this technology to ensure taxpayers' money is not wasted on a substandard system. Not only would an investment in the company mentioned be efficient and economical, it would lead to the creation of employment in our jobs-straved economy.

I strongly urge my colleagues to reject the Bill and force the Government to remove all of these faults from the system under consideration. We need a more proficient, economically-friendly system, not one that will be inefficient and of no use to a significant percentage of the population. Passing the Bill today would not only be wrong, it would also be a serious waste of money, something of which we must all be conscious when making decisions, as money is one thing we do not have.

I wish the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, every success in his position and I am confident he will do a superb job.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.