asked the Minister for Communications the total allocation to An Post under section 29 (1) of Postal and Telecommunications Services Bill, 1982, for capital works in 1984.

14.

asked the Minister for Communications the total transfer of funds to An Post in 1984 for current expenditure.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 14 together.

No contribution to finance capital works was made to An Post during 1984, but a current expenditure grant of £5 million was made.

In the Posts and Telecommunications Services Bill we made provision for capital payments to An Post.

The Minister should be aware of the rundown condition of many of the buildings that An Post obtained from the former Department of Posts and Telegraphs. The Minister's explanation is unacceptable. I regret that the Minister made no capital allocation to An Post for 1984 and I would ask the Minister to indicate now if he proposes to make a capital allocation for capital works to An Post in 1985.

While there is a provision in the Posts and Telecommunications Act, 1983 for the payment of capital grants to An Post I did not feel it necessary to make a capital grant available during 1984. There will be provision in the Estimates this year for a capital grant to An Post.

The post office and sorting office in Cork city, which I inspected as Minister of State and found it to be in an appalling condition, would require major capital expenditure. Will the Minister indicate if he has received an application from An Post for capital works in 1985 and will he indicate the proposed location of the proposed capital expenditure?

That has been repaired.

I am grateful to Deputy Allen for putting Deputy Leyden right in relation to Cork post office. There will be provision this year for a capital grant of £4 million to An Post but I do not have the details as to its expenditure.

Would the Minister agree that An Post is setting about its task of being a viable commercial operation——

That seems to be a separate question.

If the Ceann Comhairle would wait, I will relate it to the answer the Minister gave. In view of that fact, will the Minister not agree that it is important to provide An Post with both the capital and current grants that they need in this intervening period?

Everybody has been greatly impressed by the success of An Post since its establishment. I am happy with the state of An Post and I am happy that they have adequate resources to do the job.

It would be appropriate for the Minister to outline the proposed expenditure of the £4 million for 1985. The Minister should be informed as to the expenditure. In relation to the An Post fleet, was any allocation made for it in 1984?

They are very detailed questions and if the Deputy tables them I will answer them.

Question No. 15. please.

Did the Minister in his reply mention a sum of £5 million for current expenditure?

In 1984, yes.

What is the amount for 1985?

There is no provision for current expenditure in 1985.

Can the Minister say if there was an application or an agreement with An Post for an annual current expenditure allocations?

The Deputy should be aware that it was acknowledged when the Posts and Telegraphs Service Bill was drawn up and was going through this House that there would be transitional difficulties between the State Department and the commercial semi-State company. For that reason provision was made in the Bill for a transitional subsidy for An Post. That will not be necessary this year or in subsequent years.

Is the Minister saying that there will not be an increase in the cost of the An Post activities in the absence of this current expenditure grant from the State?

There has been no increase in the normal postal rate since I became Minister. As a result of my insistence postal volume and revenue is up. My policy is for price stability so far as possible in order to increase volume. If the volume increases sufficiently there will be adequate revenue to keep the services going.

If there is an application during 1985 for price increases for An Post activities will the Minister replace that price increase for the consumer with the exchange subsidy that was agreed?

That is a hypothetical question. I do not anticipate—

What is the Minister's view on it?

The Minister has unwittingly misled the House by saying that there was no increase in his period as Minister.

In the normal stamp rate.

The Minister is using words to mislead the House. There has been an increase which has affected the airmail business particulary from Shannon Airport——

Is the Deputy asking a question?

——and it has had detrimental effect on the business community.

Has the Deputy a question?

It is only appropriate and fair that I should inform the House and the Minister of the fact that he is misleading the House.

It is not in order.

Would the Ceann Comhairle not prefer me to say it here than to the press outside tomorrow?

Deputy Leyden is being mischievous. There has been no change in the normal postal rate since I became Minister. There were recent adjustments in certain postal rates for parcels and there have been certain reductions in the postal rates to EC countries.

Question No. 15.

In view of the Minister's reply, is he aware that this parcel postal rate increase is of the order of 90 per cent and will affect the mail order business?

There have been some adjustments in the postal rate for parcels and there have been some reductions in rates in some EC countries. We are doing very well in relation to postal rates, particularly in relation to the normal postal rate, which has not increased.

Question No. 15.