asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the steps, if any, he has taken over the past week, to resolve the postal and telecommunication disputes; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I would refer the Deputy to the reply given to Private Notice Questions on this subject on 20 February. It remains the case that the Department are ready to resume conciliation negotiations under agreed procedures on the claims for increased pay for staff represented by the Post Office Workers' Union. Moreover, I have made it clear that, if the union wish to refer the claims to independent arbitration, the Department will facilitate the union in every way possible in having them dealt with quickly. I have also undertaken on behalf of the Government to accept the finds of the arbitrator.

I greatly regret that the campaign of industrial action, with its attendant difficulties for industry and for the public, has continued. The action is in breach of the national agreement and the scheme of conciliation and arbitration for the civil service, to both of which the union is a party. I would again stress that the Government are anxious that the pay claims should be settled on an equitable basis but are also concerned that any settlement should not have the effect of imposing unjustified costs on Post Office users and should not endanger the continued use of orderly means of resolving pay claims in the civil service.

I would again urge the union and the staff to cease their action and to pursue their claims in accordance with the procedures which the union themselves have agreed should be used to resolve such issues.

Arising from the Minister's unsatisfactory reply I should like to know if he realises the gravity of the situation and the fact that the country is waiting for him, the person responsible, to take the initiative in an effort to resolve this dispute. He should stay with both sides until the matter is resolved.

The Deputy is making a statement. I should like to remind him that he asked permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment, a request which I am considering.

I am aware of the gravity of the situation and I do not regard my reply as unsatisfactory. The Deputy is aware that there are two key factors involved. The first is that the union are in breach of the conciliation and arbitration scheme and the national pay agreement. The union are party to both agreements. The second point is that the procedures available to the union for pursuing the claim have not been exhausted. As I stated previously, the Department did not break off negotiations and are prepared to resume discussions under the procedures of conciliation and arbitration. That is a fair offer. Immediately the union end industrial action, we can have discussions at conciliation, or the union can go to arbitration, or adopt any of the procedures under the national pay agreement which are available.

I should like to ask the Chair a question on a matter of clarification. This morning I sought permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment but I have not been told whether I have been granted permission.

The Deputy will appreciate that the Chair must wait until the end of Question Time in case there are other similar requests. A decision will be made at the conclusion of Question Time.

I agree to withdraw my request in favour of Deputy O'Donnell.

The Chair does not give notice until after Question Time because all requests are considered together.

Is the Minister aware that his colleague, the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy, indicated that 80 per cent of all man-days lost are now in the public sector, particularly in the Post Office? Does this not give rise to the need for reflection by the Minister on the problems in his Department, how he and management are running it?

We are entering into a debate on this matter and I must stop it.

I showed my concern by establishing a number of committees, under chairmen from outside the Department to deal with a variety of grievances held by staff in the Department. I do not intend going into those in detail. I should like to make it clear that neither the Government nor the Department wish that the Post Office staff should be under-paid. However, it must be accepted that it is not sufficient for the union to put forward a claim. The union must show that such a claim is justified to the extent claimed.

The Minister should come to the nub of this problem. There is deadlock now and somebody must take the initiative to break it and get those involved around the table. The country is appealing to the Minister to take that initiative because, in the final analysis, he is the person responsible for maintaining the postal and telecommunications services.

The Deputy is suggesting that I should destroy the scheme of conciliation and arbitration for which the workers of the country fought hard in the past. It was regarded as a great victory for the workers when they succeeded in having such a scheme introduced. To a considerable extent the scheme is there to protect the interests of the workers. I should like to make it clear that I am most anxious to be fair to the workers in my Department. I repeat that the Department did not break off negotiations and that immediately industrial action is called off negotiations, either at conciliation or arbitration level, or under any of the procedures open to the union under the national agreement, can be pursued.

I do not think Deputy O'Donnell wanted the Minister to destroy the conciliation and arbitration scheme. Is the Minister aware that, in spite of his piety and of washing his hands of the blood of this just man—a Pontius Pilot act——

The Deputy should ask questions without introducing acrimony.

——the Republic is at a standstill because of this dispute? While the Minister has a noble position to defend he should invite the union, without any strings attached or preconditions, to meet him to resolve this dispute. The dispute will have to be resolved and the piety which the Minister is standing over at present will not convince the men involved who are seeking pay increases.

This is turning into a debate and the Deputy should appreciate that I cannot permit that, however important the matter is.

Is the Minister aware of the peculiar predicament the people in Donegal find themselves in? They do not have the advantage of automatic telephone exchanges——

Donegal is no more relevant than the rest of the country.

——and there are factories in that county that cannot make contact with the outside world. Is he aware that people in small villages can only avail of the facilities offered by local telephone exchanges? That is a dangerous situation. The Minister should forget about his piety and ask the union to meet him to settle this matter. The Minister, and his colleagues, made promises to these people before the last election.

The Deputy is delivering a lecture and that is not permitted.

It is because I am so concerned about reaching a settlement that I am convinced there is only one way this matter can be resolved and that is by operating within the agreed procedures. I can assure the Deputy that were I to break with this——

Piety.

——the last to thank me when the strike is over would be the union. Negotiations were not broken off by us and they can be resumed immediately industrial action ends. There will be no problem in that sense. We can have meetings at conciliation or arbitration or under any aspect of the national wage agreement the union wishes to avail of.

The Minister will do as I have suggested in about a fortnight's time but he could do that now with glory.

Does the Minister agree that the general perception of his Department is of a great big mess and that this strike is but a symptom of that?

I will not permit that question. That is only creating further acrimonious debate.