Mr Chairman, when the Committee reported progress yesterday evening, my thoughts had gone back 22 years to the time I flew to Walvis Bay in an ambulance plane Cl30—it was a Hercules instead of the usual Dakota. On that aircraft there was a surgical team consisting of myself, Dr Louis Du Plessis, a thoracic surgeon and consultant at the Military hospital, and a nursing sister. We had taken all the necessary surgical equipment, sterile bandages, etc, with us. When we arrived there, we found the patient had sustained serious chest injuries. I do not want to mention the word “blood” again, and I shall therefore say that when a lung is injured, fluid and air seep out of the lung into the cavity between the lung and the ribs. Pressure is then exerted on the lung, and the patient finds it increasingly difficult to breathe. It then becomes a matter of urgency to elevate that pneumothorax. While the aircraft was gaining altitude, we prepared the patient. We performed the necessary operation, inserted a drainage tube, performed all the necessary smaller operations and got the patient safely to Voortrek-kerhoogte. As far as we know, that was the first time a military aircraft went out with a surgical team, an operation was performed in mid-air and the patient was taken safely to his destination. This happened 22 years ago.

What is the situation today? I do not have sufficient time to tell the Committee everything about the three military hospitals, with more than 1 000 beds. Military hospitals Nos 1 and 2 are also recognized as training hospitals by the South African Medical and Dental Council. They work in very close co-operation with the medical faculties of the Universities of Pretoria and Stellenbosch. They do work of an extremely high quality and they are leaders in various fields. The rehabilitation centre at Voortrekkerhoogte is one of the largest and best in the country. There is wonderful co-operation between the Defence Force, various Government departments and the private sector. The Southern Cross and other service organizations are doing great work in a wonderful team effort which proves that they are dealing with people and not merely with cases or numbers.

The operational sick bay at Ondangwa to which the hon member for Pietersburg referred, was erected at a cost of less than R500 000. It consists of four mobile units, two theatres, a dispensary, examination rooms and an intensive care ward with 18 beds. There are even mobile theatres. There are also mobile laboratories, a blood bank and so on. The South African Medical Service of the Defence Force has some of the most modem surgical apparatus and equipment at its disposal there and all surgery can be performed here within four hours after a member of the Defence Force has been wounded. I must point out that this equipment has been specially developed for Africa and our type of warfare. It has also evoked great interest abroad.

What do all these services I have referred to mean in practice, this comprehensive service which is rendered to the Defence Force and also to a wider spectrum? At the military hospital we also have the biokinetic centre where rehabilitation is completed. In this rehabilitation centre 115 patients are subjected to remedial activities every day, of whom 76% are orthopaedic cases and 23% have cardio-respiratory defects. The biokinetic centre at present has the largest lung and heart rehabilitation programme in the country. There are approximately 145 patients who visit the centre three times a week.

I could perhaps say that we might send a few hon members of the PFP to that heart unit for rehabilitation, and possibly we could also send the hon member Mr Vermeulen there for lung rehabilitation and to get him to give up smoking. [Interjections.]

As regards that heart unit at the military hospital I could perhaps say in layman’s language that we know that heart and lung diseases are not only the most important causes of death, but also the most important causes of people becoming debilitated, so that they cannot do their work properly and have to take sick leave. About five years ago a method was developed by means of which catheterization could be used in the sense that when a person suffered a heart attack and a blood clot was lodged in an artery, a catheter could be inserted through the heart to penetrate that blood vessel. That blood clot could then be dissolved with streptokinase to achieve recanalization and reperfusion of the coronary arteries. That bloodclot causes the heart muscle to die, and if enough of the heart muscle dies, the person also dies. This extremely technical procedure has to be performed within a few hours after a heart attack and I am proud to say that it is being performed in military hospitals. Another procedure is the by-pass operation where a blood-vessel is inserted to by-pass a blocked cordial blood-vessel. This is a complex operation. Another method has been devised in which a catheter is pushed through the obstruction, the catheter is inflated and the obstruction is removed. Research has also been done on this method and it can be performed in military hospitals.

The writer P J Schoeman who wrote so beautifully about South West and its people, said about an old Bushman that he had never in his life seen so much age concentrated into such a small space. I want to refer to one incident which best illustrates the preparedness, the sense of duty and the loyalty of members of the South African Medical Services of the Defence Force. A well-known medical journal The Prescriber described how on 30 September 1983 rifleman d’Oliviera was wounded at 10h45 am. Within ten minutes a team of medical orderlies was on the scene and they performed the same kind of operation we had performed in Walvis Bay. Within 21 minutes he was at the field base, and within two hours and five minutes he was in the operating theatre at Odangwa. Unfortunately I do not have time to quote a telegram relating to this case. This patient had a projectile in his chest. Major De Villiers, the commanding officer, Captain Eloff and Captain Reineke removed that projectile—I have colour photographs here—from the patient’s chest by means of a cable. In my opinion the South African Medical Service renders the best service one can hope to find. Our men can treat this service with pride and rely on it with confidence.

Mr Chairman, I should like to conclude with a very serious personal request to you. I also want to ask that my request be conveyed to Mr Speaker. If I should ever collapse inside or outside this House from a heart attack, or a bullet wound or perhaps even exhaustion, I earnestly request that you send me to the military hospital.

Mr Chairman, the hon member Dr Vilonel waxed lyrical about the medical services of the Defence Force, but today I want to talk about another branch of the Defence Force about which I feel far too little is said, namely our Air Force.

I think the South African Air Force is neglected when it comes to the discussion of the Defence Vote and for that reason I want to put in a good word today for the South African Air Force, which probably has one of the proudest records of any air force in the world.

Before I do that, I should like to refer to another matter. On behalf of this side of the House, and particularly on the instructions of the management committee of the Defence study group of the NP, I want to apologize to the hon the Minister for his having been placed in a position which he really did not deserve during this debate yesterday. I want him to know that all right-minded members, and I think I can include all members and even members of the CP in this, disagree with the tone of the speech addressed to him yesterday.

Speak on behalf of your own party.

I expected that, and I am glad that the hon Whip of the CP has identified himself with the attack the hon member for Jeppe made on the hon Minister. [Interjections.] However, hon members have also heard now that there was no comments from any other hon member. On behalf of this party—not on behalf of the CP— I want to apologize to the whole of the Defence Force for the fact that the SA Defence Force has been accused of allegedly fighting for the communists. It is a slap in the face of the entire Defence Force. On behalf of the Defence study group of the NP and also the NP as a whole, I want to tell the Chief of the Defence Force that we dissociate ourselves from that standpoint and that we do not feel that it befits an hon member of this House to make such an allegation in the highest Chamber in South Africa.

I feel that the SA Air Force with its proud record fights for the security of South Africa. In the year under review something happened, however, which was presented in a certain way in the Press and which has to be rectified here. Within the space of four months three Impalas of the SA Air Force crashed, and the way in which this was reported in the media, may have created the impression that the safety record of the SA Air Force is not the best in the world. Today I want to give the real facts with regard to the SA Air Force, however.

It is not true that we only lost three Impalas. We lost eight aircraft, namely two Mirages, one MK3 and one MKF1, one Puma and two Kudus. We lost five men in these accidents. I, however, want to refer to the real facts regarding the ratio of safety in the Air Force. The figure for avoidable serious aircraft accidents is 0,74 per 10 000 flying hours. This is a remarkable record and ranks among the best in the world. It has to be borne in mind that last year the figure was 1,65 per 10 000 flying hours. The average for the past 10 years was 1,99. This means a decrease in losses to the book value of R32 million during the past financial year. One may well ask how a safety factor of an average of 1,99 for the past 10 years could be reduced to 0,74.

The Air Force decided to use three methods. The first method was to promote safety in the Air Force. This was done inter alia by training 83 flight safety officers. This means that one of these highly trained officers is stationed at headquarters, at every flying unit and at every base to promote safety by impressing the need for safety on every officer and pilot. It strikes one that whenever one visits a base, whether it be on the border or inside South Africa, for example at Hoedspruit, one sees large advertisements and posters emphasizing the need for safety in every corridor, in every lecture hall and in every diningroom. It immediately strikes one that the need for safety is being impressed on all Air Force personnel, and I want to congratulate the SA Air Force on these measures. I do not think that one can adopt any other approach. The Air Force has made use of posters, films, slides and symposiums and this is how they achieved their positive results.

They also decided that their hardware had to be the best in South Africa. That is why, in co-operation with Armscor, they developed the best flying helmets and the best oxygen masks or oxygen apparatus in the world, as well as direction-finding radio beacons which we were no longer able to import. We are glad that they are now also available in South Africa. In 1983, 850 of these were manufactured and delivered. With regard to other equipment such as lifejackets, G-suits and flying boots the SA Defence Force and the Air Force in particular has succeeded in safeguarding the ordinary soldier and the pilot and we were able to reduce the flying accident rate.

The Air Force also decided to introduce incentive measures with regard to accident-free flying hours by giving recognition to achievements in this field. Certificates are issued to individuals. After 500 accident-free flying hours a silver certificate is issued and after 1 000 accident-free flying hours a gold certificate is issued. What is striking is that whereas only 43 silver certificates have been issued, 143 gold certificates have been issued. The pilots encourage each other so much that the Airforce had to begin awarding shields to units. After one year of accident-free flying hours a unit wins a bronze shield, after two years a silver shield and after three years a gold shield. What struck me was that 22 bronze, six silver and 16 gold shields have already been awarded. This gives an indication of the high standard of safety maintained in the Air Force.

I feel that the foregoing indicates that the Air Force is endeavouring to achieve maximum safety in the service and is also succeeding in this. The results prove this. They also prove that we have the best-trained and the most dedicated pilots in the Air Force and that in co-operation with the Air Force, Armscor has succeeded by means of its own expertise and perserverance, in designing aircraft and other equipment for us which ranks among the best in the world. I should like to wish the Air Force everything of the best.

Mr Chairman, I support the hon member for Roodeplaat in what he said and want to welcome him to another lobby in this House. There is an Air Force lobby here and till now that lobby has consisted of only the hon member for Kroonstad and myself. If the hon member for Roodeplaat would like to join that lobby, we will consider granting him admission.

I shall come back to the question of the Air Force, but I should like to start off by welcoming the senior appointments that have been made since the last parliamentary session. In particular, I want to welcome the appointment of the new Chief of the Air Force. I wish him well with his tasks.

I now want to deal with a broader issue which has been raised earlier in this debate. Since the Justice and Defence Votes are being dealt with simultaneously, I want to say that, while it may be appropriate in the sense that one needs defence in order to have justice and one needs justice in relation to defence, it is difficult for members to attend and take part in both debates. The issue has been raised of détente and of the Nkomati Accord and the position of the Defence Force in that. There has also been suggested—and I reject it completely—that what is in fact going to happen is that the SA Defence Force is somehow or other going to be involved in defending communist doctrines or communist concepts. I find that so ridiculous that I do not think one even needs to spend a moment in order to just reject it.

The point that I want to make is: Why is détente possible? Why is it possible to have a non-aggression pact? The issue is very simple. If one does not negotiate and does not deal in these sort of things from a position of strength one cannot negotiate at all. The purpose of the Defence Force of South Africa has to my mind never been to make war, but to defend South Africa to achieve peace. If one can actually achieve peace without fighting and without sacrificing lives the Defence Force is actually achieving its objective. Therefore if the hon the Prime Minister, the hon the Minister of Defence or the hon the Minister of Foreign Affairs can achieve peace without the Defence Force fighting, right-thinking South Africans will back them in that project. If people do not back them in that project then the majority of South Africans, whatever their political beliefs, will reject those people. To my mind to suggest that we should not make peace when we can but to have recourse to force and strength, is betraying the whole concept of a defence force. I want to reject—I do not want to be associated with it—any endeavour to place peace efforts in South Africa under suspicion. When this issue is dealt with internationally it should be well known that the peace efforts have the backing of virtually the whole of South Africa. They may not have the backing of a tiny minority group, but the majority of South Africans prefer peace to war and see the Defence Force in that role.

One of the problems that I see though is that when one has a non-aggression pact or a series of non-aggression pacts there is a danger to the motivation of people in connection with defence. The view is that while we now have a non-aggression pact, we now do not have to have the same degree of defence as we have had before, that we do not need to be so involved because there is no feeling of danger. That is a matter which has to receive the attention of the Defence Force in depth. Motivation is a subject—I have spoken about it before—which becomes even more of a problem at a time when one has this kind of approach. I hope the hon the Minister will make an extra effort to utilize the manpower of the Defence Force effectively during this period, to make sure that people feel that they are employing their time usefully to the maximum extent possible and to ensure that they understand that one of the reasons why one can have non-aggression pacts is because of the strength, alertness and preparedness of the Defence Force.

In that context also one might mention that perhaps we should pay a little more attention to the training of people who can be used eventually in civilian life there are people obviously, for example artisans and others, whose talents can be used in civilian life thereafter, but I believe that we should pay more attention to the general position so that a mean feels he is doing something which is going to be useful to him. Even in some minor respect, when he leaves the Defence Force.

The issue of the chaplains also arose. Sir, if I am part of the Air Force lobby, then I must tell you I am also part of the chaplain lobby. I have stated before what my views are in regard to these things. I appreciate the services which are rendered. I am quite happy that we should look at the position. I do not believe a chaplain becomes a chaplain because he wants to be paid. I think there are many people there who actually do a lot of work for which they do not get paid at all. I think the whole issue of professional staff and the employing of professional people with particular qualifications can perhaps be looked at again. I think we should look at that in a careful manner. We should also look at the question of professional people who as a result of an over-supply are not employed in their professional capacity but who should like to be employed as such. The other aspect that arises is the view that with the spirit of détente we now have one does not need money. Actually I believe that the time has come for a major look at a whole new generation of weaponry. I welcome the appointment of the Geldenhuys Committee because the thing I fear is that while we may have a strong defence force we may suddenly find ourselves with an obsolescence problem because we have not paid enough attention to the dramatic changes that can take place in regard to weaponry in this kind of situation. I am concerned—and here I think particularly about the Air Force—at the possibility of major changes in the balance of power which could come about in Southern Africa if hostile powers were to introduce large numbers of modern aircraft into this sphere. We have to be ready for that; we have to look at that because at very short notice the balance of power can be changed with aircraft in that form. This will have an effect not only on the Air Force but also on the ground forces, because there is a very large difference between being able to operate without fear of air attack than being able to operate with air superiority on your side rather than against you. To my mind this is one of the major factors we need to look at.

In paragraph 37 of the report reference is made to the question of spares. I only want to say two things in this regard. In the first place I think as far as the Air Force is concerned we should, if anything, rather have an over supply of spares. In the second place when one looks at the auditor’s report from time to time one finds reason to get upset, as I do, and the hon the Minister and the Defence Force know it. The people in charge of spares have to be made more conscious of the fact that if they lose one essential part of an aircraft, of a helicopter, they may put a whole unit out of action. That is why I think we need to spend more time to try to get them to understand that we have to look after spares like gold. Whether we produce them ourselves or have to obtain it overseas we have to introduce the realization that we have to look after these things because they are vital, because the absence of one spare part can put a whole aircraft, which costs millions of rand, out of action.

Another matter which I should like to raise if you will allow me to do so, Mr Chairman, is that we actually should encourage more ex-servicemen to participate in ex-service organizations, in particular in organizations which relate to their former units. In this connection I should like to express my appreciation to those who were instrumental in making it possible for me to have a closer association with my old squadron, 15 Squadron of the SAAF. I am grateful for that, and I would like to place it on record. Similarly there are other ex-servicemen who I believe are in the same category and who should be encouraged to take a greater interest in their former units.

Mr Chairman, the speech of the hon member for Yeoville was constructive, particularly in regard to the question of weapons becoming obsolete. I have no doubt that Armscor has taken notice of what he has said. Another point the hon member made which I think was important is in regard to spares. He says we should rather have an oversupply of spares, and I agree with that fully. He said so specifically with reference to the Air Force and I should like to say that in the light of our experience in the Navy the Navy also needs an oversupply of spares.

On this occasion I should like to deal specifically with the SA Navy. Simonstown has been my constituency ever since I became a member of Parliament and Simonstown and the SA Navy go inseparably together. Sir, it is only through adversity that men and organizations can be properly tested, and I think I speak for all hon members when I say that the SA Navy has been through much adversity in recent times. The fact that the Navy has emerged from adversity with its morale intact, speaks volumes for the leadership and quality of the officers and men of the SA Navy, from the Chief of the Navy down to the newly joined national servicemen. I meet senior officers, senior rates and seamen, obviously, on many occasions, and I detect no alarm and no despondency among their ranks. Instead of that, I detect a determination to get on with the job, and a devotion to duty, which I find to be wholly admirable and commendable. Unlike some sections of the Press, which indulged in a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth after the finding following the inquest in relation to the death of Chief Petty Officer Webb of the SAS President Kruger, I do not think that there is any reason for such an attitude to prevail. The Navy acknowledges that there is room for improvement, and has taken the necessary steps to bring this about, as the hon the Minister is well aware.

Although I was not present personally, I understand from those hon members who were present that the recent naval exercises were most impressive. The Navy is unable to answer its critics in public, and I think it replied in the best possible way by demonstrating its efficiency, its competence and its keenness, and by “doing” instead of talking. Last year, in this House, I appealed to hon members to put the question of the collision between the SAS President Kruger and the SAS Tafelberg into proper perspective. I also drew attention to the number of collisions that have taken place in navies of other countries in the world; navies of impeccable reputation and of a far longer standing than ours. I also emphasized then that our own Navy’s record was in fact absolutely first class. I wish to make the point again today without any apology, for the simple reason that the handwringing indulged in by The Argus, for example, was totally unnecessary. To quote a leader from that newspaper, published on 8 February this year, referring to a statement which that newspaper attributed to the hon the Minister of Defence in connection with a particular collision, I read from that day’s issue of that newspaper:

Mr Chairman, although I can obviously not speak for the hon the Minister, I am confident that he made no such suggestion because this hon Minister has been associated with the Navy over a period of years, going back to before the days when he was the Officer Commanding of the Military Academy at Saldanha Bay, where he was charged with the training of young Naval officers, together with their colleagues in the Army and the Air Force. I do know therefore that he has always held the Navy in the highest esteem.

Before leaving the subject of the SAS President Kruger, I wish to re-emphasize that as long as ships continue to plough the seas there will be collisions, even in an age of computers. Therefore I ask hon members of this House to spare a thought of sympathy for those who carry the burden of the command of ships. After the US Navy aircraft carrier Wasp collided with the destroyer Hobson, on the night of 26 April 1952, the following appeared in the prestigious Wall Street Journal, and I quote:

This is an article which I commend to all hon members of this House, and I therefore ask hon members to spare a thought of sympathy for a particular commanding officer, Captain Wim de Lange, who has accepted the verdict with dignity becoming a Naval officer, and to join generously in wishing him and the other young officers who were also involved in that collision all the best for their future.

It is not my intention to knock the navies of other countries, especially great and friendly countries like the USA. However, merely to round off my theme of getting the right perspective, I want once more to draw the attention of the Committee to the following events: The collision between the aircraft carrier the John F Kennedy and the destroyer Belknap on 22 November 1975; the collision between the USS Frank E Evans and the Australian aircraft carrier the Melbourne in 1969; and finally, the 8 September 1923, when a squadron commander in the United States Navy led seven of his 14 destroyers on to the rocks at Porto Anguello in California. There are many other cases involving the navies of other countries but I shall desist from quoting any further incidents of this nature because I think I have made my point.

Another case of adversity in the SA Navy was that of Dieter Gerhardt. All I have to say about that matter is that the Navy deserved better than this. It would be idle to pretend that the Navy has not been deeply wounded by this. However, as I said at the very outset, the Navy has the resilience and courage to bounce back, and I, for one, am very proud of the Navy. I have no doubt that the whole of the SA Defence Force has taken the necessary steps to prevent a recurrence of this sort of thing because it could equally easily have happened in any one of the other arms of the Defence Force. In this regard, I take as my theme, the fact that it is an ill wind that blows nobody any good!

So much then for the past. Let us for a moment have a look at the future. I make a special plea to the hon the Minister for a bigger Navy. We have an enormously long coastline with many harbours and many cities to protect. I have spoken of the high morale of this arm of the Defence Force but I submit that the graph of morale can only continue upwards when there is something to look forward to in the form of new ships, new technologies and greater challenges. Bearing in mind the conditions off our coastline, I make an appeal for bigger ships—not for big ships but for bigger ships. I want to remind the hon the Minister that frigates and corvettes are still, comparatively speaking, small ships but they do at least offer a wider range of activity and advancement than the admittedly excellent Minister Class strikecraft. Our submarine branch, our minesweepers and our harbour defence craft are all fine vessels but they need to be augmented in order to ensure the maritime safety of South Africa.

In my opinion the Navy needs more of the defence budget. I often made this plea in previous years, and I am pleased that the hon the Minister recognized this fact yesterday. Closely allied to the Navy are the aircraft of Maritime Command, flown by men who are second to none in the world. Here again, I want to say that these men look forward to replacements for the splendid Shackleton aircraft that have done such long and yeoman service. Therefore, I ask the hon the Minister to get together with his hon colleague the Minister of Foreign Affairs with a view to knocking some sense into the heads of those Western countries in order to make them realize that it is in their interests as well as ours that our entire maritime defence be of the highest order and must be improved.

With regard to pleas that have been made for a coastguard, I have only one observation to make. In the USA, the coastguard deals with smuggling; in the United Kingdom, I think, it is used for lifesaving; in Canada it is used for fisheries. However, we in South Africa have pollution vessels such as the Kuswag. We also have the sea rescue service, the NSRI. We have our fisheries vessels and in respect of sea and air defence we have the Navy and the Air Force. Therefore, I am afraid that if the appeal for a coastguard service as such succeeds, it will result in expenditure which I do not feel will be justified. Rather let the Navy have a larger slice of the defence cake.

Mr Chairman, I wish to associate myself with the navy lobby and I take great pleasure in speaking after the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs and Fisheries. I just want to tell him that we greatly appreciate the fact that he, as Deputy Minister of another department, has found it possible to participate in this discussion. I think this shows the interest he takes in his own constituency, and that is also the reason why no one will ever be able to unseat him.

Every time one comes into contact with the SA Defence Force, there is one aspect of it which one cannot fail to notice. That is the outstanding calibre of the corps of officers, and that includes the female sex. [Interjections.]

I want to say this morning that the SA Navy is certainly no exception to this rule. On our recent visit to Silvermine and Simonstown, we were all impressed by the high quality of the corps of leaders in the Navy. We were impressed by the thorough training of Navy officers and we were impressed by the skill with which our marines carried out certain exercises at sea. We want to convey our congratulations to the SA Navy. One only realizes how far the influence of the Navy extends when one is standing on the banks of the Zambezi and one sees a South African marine coming past in a canoe.

The fact that it is 178 years since South Africa was last attacked directly from the sea, during the second British occupation of the Cape in 1806, may have been responsible for the fact that a big navy, a strong naval strike force, has not been priority number 1 on our defence budgets. In fact, the present budget also reflects this to some extent. R481 is being appropriated for landward defence, R179 million for air defence and R153 for maritime defence.

At the moment, however, things are happening which make it essential that South Africa’s navy be expanded, and in this respect I should very much like to endorse the remarks made by the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs and Fisheries. I want to refer specifically to the phenomenal growth of the Russian navy since the Second World War, and in particular to the use of a part of that navy in territorial waters where it presents a very great threat to South Africa. No one builds up anything without intending to use it at some stage. I think this phenomenal build-up of the Russian navy should be seen against the background of a specific ideological objective. It should also be seen against the background of methods for achieving that ideological objective.

When it comes to an ideological objective, I want to quote the words of the head of the Russian navy, Admiral Boshkov. He says:

That is important. This ideological objective is “building communism”. In particular, I want to tell the hon member for Wynberg that the statement which he made, that the Soviet Union acts haphazardly and makes use of opportunities when they present themselves, is not true at all. Every action of the Soviet Union is ideologically inspired. Its methods for achieving this particular and clearly identified ideological objective may vary from time to time, but the objective remains unchanged. It is precisely this ideological objective which also has a bearing on the total onslaught. The fact that these objectives are not always achieved is not due to the fact that they do not exist, but rather to the fact that they are recognized in advance and that effective countermeasures are then taken. I think one should always bear this in mind. The SA Defence Force, under the leadership of the present hon Minister of Defence as well, has always been among those who have taken these effective measures in time.

I also want to refer to the method which the Soviet Union is presently using to achieve its ideological objective. Once again I want to quote the Chief of the Russian Navy. He says:

He also says:

The Russian navy, consisting of 2 400 warships and 430 submarines, is further supplemented by 2 500 trading vessels, but these trading vessels have an even better espionage network than those extending from the Russian embassies all over the world. What makes the expansion of our own navy particularly necessary is the use of this dangerous navy in territorial waters where it presents a great threat to us. The Russians have already established a part of their navy permanently in the Atlantic Ocean. Experts allege that the Russians are better equipped at the moment to deny the West access to the Atlantic Ocean than the Germans were during the Second World War. However, they are also moving into the Indian Ocean, in spite of the fact that this area has been declared an area of everlasting peace by the UN. A massive build-up or expansion or deployment of the Russian navy is taking place in the Indian Ocean as well. Harbours built with Western capital during the colonial period are now being used exclusively by the Russians for their own purposes.

In the light of this, we cannot neglect to develop and strengthen our own navy. The reason why this strong Russian navy is being deployed in the Indian Ocean is obvious. It is to cut off the lifeline of the West, the sea route around the Cape. In this connection, Dr Chester Crocker said only recently that if it succeeded, the West would come to a standstill within 30 to 60 days. From the nature of the case, our navy also has a function to perform in safeguarding the Cape Sea route. The hon member for Wynberg is right in saying that we cannot do this alone. We need the help of our allies to be able to do it. In this respect, South Africa does not deserve to be boycotted, but to be helped. We do not want to use sophisticated weapons to enforce apartheid or anything else anywhere, but to preserve the lifeline of the West. That is why we need this help and that is why our own navy should also be expanded. One would welcome it if the navies of our allies would once again call at our harbours. We would appreciate it if Simonstown could also be used again. If the Falklands war has had one consequence, it is that apart from Simonstown, the Western powers do not have a single naval base in the South Atlantic Ocean and in the southern parts of the Indian Ocean. Against a formidable opponent like the Soviet Union, this could be fatal.

Mr Chairman, I believe that I have advanced sufficient reasons to show why our own navy should be expanded.

Mr Chairman, it is always a privilege to speak after the hon member for Randfontein, not only because of his beautiful voice and fine delivery, but because of the contents of his speeches. The hon member is a student of the events of his times and he is always keeping abreast of developments in the field in which he has already proved himself to be an expert. We all want to thank the hon member for his solid contribution.

Furthermore, I should very much like to endorse the remarks made by every hon member in this House who has expressed appreciation for the contribution made by the Defence force in the times in which we live, and in particular to the leaders in our Defence Force who devote themselves to building up the SA Defence Force. In particular, I wish to pay tribute to the hon the Minister, his general staff, the corps of officers, the non-commissioned officers and all the other ranks of the SA Defence Force for the way in which they deal with the realities of the day and for the way in which the realities of tomorrow are approached. In particular, I wish to congratulate the hon the Minister and the general staff on the way in which they have succeeded in creating and developing leadership in all race groups in recent times. By doing this, they are bringing home to those communities the concept of peace and law and order. We also have great appreciation for the level they have attained in the times in which we live.

I actually want to devote my attention to something else. It was difficult to ascertain what exactly was being spent on the training of leaders in the Defence Force. It is difficult if one confines oneself to those expenses that can be directly related to the development of leadership. The figure I arrived at in this connection was a meagre 7,5% of the budget. 7,5% of the budget amounts to quite a few hundreds of millions of rands, but there are certain factors that have to be excluded. The cost of the Army, Navy and Air Force colleges is excluded, for example, as well as the extremely valuable and comprehensive courses offered at two technikons. I also exclude the broad logistics used in the training of our corps of leaders. Furthermore, I exclude the following-up training provided at a high level. I also exclude the training of pilots, to which the hon member for Roodeplaat also referred. Hon members know that it costs an enormous amount of money to train one pilot. In addition, I exclude all the Defence Force staff whose function it is to train leaders.

When all these factors are conservatively taken into account, one may come to the conclusion that only a small portion of the Defence force budget is being used for the purposes for which Defence Force expenditure, as the man in the street understands it, is used. By far the greater part of the total allocation is eventually invested in human beings and their qualities.

As a result of the structure of our Defence Force, it is forced to train one man out of every 10 as a leader. When this structure is analysed, it would appear to me that at the company, battalion and division levels, the Defence Force is succeeding in training at least one person out of every eight as a leader. The Defence Force is actually obliged to make a leader available for every eight men it has.

When the leadership structure of the Defence Force is analysed, one sees that the Defence Force is obliged to instil into its leaders the confidence to take decisions. The ability of the Defence Force leaders to take decisions means the difference between life and death or the difference between life and serious disablement—not only for the leaders themselves, but for every man serving under them. However, the Defence Force gets young men of 18 or 19 who are prepared to enter this command structure and who do so with success. In this connection, one should also bear in mind the standpoint of the Defence Force with regard to every young man who joins its ranks, namely that they want to return him intact to the family from which he was taken. That is a wonderful standpoint.

However, there are also certain failures in this connection. The mortality rate in the Defence Force is less than 1% and serious injury or permanent disablement is also less than 1%. This should be seen in the light of the extremely difficult exercises in which the Defence Force is engaged.

When one looks at the training of leaders in the Defence Force, one also sees very strict discipline. I want to appeal to the hon the Minister and his general staff not to yield when this discipline is attacked from time to time, because the success of the Defence Force depends on strict discipline. Our boys are subjected to a strenuous physical fitness programme. Even though they have a hard time under this programme, this fitness is nevertheless essential for them in their period of service. They are also obliged to maintain strict spiritual and pastoral standards. The success of our Defence Force is to a large extent bound up with the great task of ensuring that its members are spiritually disciplined. Emphasis should be placed, therefore, on the quality of the weaponry, the spiritual equipment to which I have referred, and especially on good organization.

The one thing for which the Defence Force does not always get the credit which it deserves is the fact that it renders a very great service to South African society in respect of the concept of civil disobedience. It is the task of the Defence Force today to identify and to discipline that young man, the “deserter from life”, the civilian “deserter” who cannot even cope with the pressures of normal life. The Defence Force has to turn him into a fully developed person who will be up to the high standard maintained by the Defence Force. However, the Defence Force also gets the kind of young man whom we may call a “vulture”, a person with an egocentric lifestyle who is only interested in money and in those things in life which are important to him. The Defence Force must get him to serve South Africa’s cause. I want to convey my deep gratitude to the Defence Force for the great service which it renders in respect of this civil disobedience, in disciplining these people and turning them into decent people whom we may eventually be proud of. I thank the Defence Force for the quality of its teamwork and also for the degree of individualism which is maintained, where the people concerned cannot go on living in their isolated compartments, but have to come out into the open and to expose themselves to the life which awaits them. I want to thank the Defence Force for having confidence in our young people and I want to congratulate them on the youthfulness of our corps of officers. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Brentwood has raised a very interesting subject in this debate. I think that there is no question about it but that the SADF plays a vital role in these important times in straightening the backbone of the country’s youth, particularly in today’s permissive society. At the same time I must say that there is nothing wrong with South Africa’s youth. The more one comes into contact with them, the more one realizes of what tremendous quality some of our youngsters are. One is also impressed with the extent to which they are prepared to do their bit and indeed they do it.

I should like to associate myself with the remarks made by my hon leader and other hon members of the House in respect of those who made the supreme sacrifice in the year since this Vote was last debated, and their loved ones as well as those who sustained injuries. The debt they have paid must not have been paid in vain. We see today the unfolding drama in African politics of the very attainment of the goals of reform behind the military shield. That is being attained despite all the attempts by the Eastern bloc countries to thwart it.

I am sorry there are not more hon members of the CP in the House today. As far as defence goes, all that has been built up over the years in this respect—the rolling back of the Eastern Bloc—influence in Africa and its replacement by Western influence, can so easily be adversely affected by the approach to politics in this country. In fact, one sees them almost as God’s gift to the Russians in the fight against the tremendous insurgency problem which is inspired so professionally throughout the world, for the reasons mentioned by the hon member for Randfontein. They have a very specific goal.

I should like to discuss a specific subject today with the hon the Minister. However, just before I do so I want to tender my congratulations to his staff, the officers and warrant officers of the SA Defence Force, for a magnificent effort once again during the year. There is so much one can be proud of about our Defence Force. Not least of these is our unique Commando system which has made great strides over the last 20 years or so. They are no longer “Kranswagters” or “Skietpiete”, or any of those derogatory names. They aspire to the highest ideals—it is the only way in which one can run any form of military organization—of regimental traditions, and in many cases they have achieved a very high level indeed.

I want to say to the hon the Minister—I have raised this before—that in some cases he is flogging a very willing horse. I should like to offer these points again because I believe they are very important, particularly in certain areas. The question of phasing in the provisions of the amendment to the Defence Act which was passed in 1982 on the basis of priority units first is causing incredible pressure on some of the serving members in commando units. In most cases they are volunteers who have served for many years. I do not think many people in South Africa really know the degree of input in terms of time, financial loss and inconvenience that these people are subjected to in order to achieve a satisfactory standard. They undertake the whole spectrum of military activity, including border duty, local operations in their area, training, and also that great bugbear to any keen soldier, namely administration. Of course that in itself is an enormous task in a unit if one wants to run it properly. It is also important from the point of view of maintaining morale. If the administration of a unit is good then the troops feel well looked after. I say the hon the Minister is flogging a dead horse in this respect.

A willing horse.

Yes, a willing horse, but it might be dead if he keeps flogging it very much longer. I say that because some of the volunteer members are the only ones in certain areas who received a polite note via their unit headquarters stating that in terms of the amendment to the Defence Act they will now be serving 12 days a year until they reach the age of 55 years. Having served faithfully, very willingly and proudly the burden once again falls back on them. Instead of working according to a system of priority areas first, cases where units have a critical manpower situation should have been allowed to commence training those who have not yet served. It could be done on a phased basis, whether a company at a time at one or two camps a year, with minimum financial outlay. They need a pair of overalls, a pair of boots and a “doiby”. They do not even need a rifle initially. I want to make a very earnest appeal to the hon the Minister to ensure that this option is very carefully reconsidered. These units are strained to the limit. Their operational requirements in their own areas have increased. They are expected to maintain a satisfactory level of leader group and trained personnel by attendance at courses, training others and, in some cases, manning local bases as part of their training. The situation is such that many of those personnel who at this stage are experienced in administrative work and are staff the hon the Minister can be proud of as a result of this unique system, are only continuing to serve for one reason namely that they do not want to see what they have been working at so hard over the years break down. This does not happen because of a feeling that they are getting anywhere, that the burden is becoming lighter and that they can sustain it longer or for more altruistic reasons. The reason is a far more personal one and that is that they do not want to see this creation of theirs simply collapse. However, I must emphasize the fact that in many cases some of the leader group personnel are falling away so fast that the hon the Minister is going to have an extremely difficult task to replace them. The training of these people takes years. One no sooner gets a man trained to the extent where he has completed a platoon commander’s course and becomes a useful member of that leader group, than he is transferred. In actual fact, one has to have six or seven candidate officers in the pipeline if one even hopes to maintain one’s level of junior leaders as well as continuity in this respect. If we do not have the senior personnel who are conversant with all these matters then I am afraid that as far as some units are concerned we are going to have to face a complete shutdown because of the leader groups not being able to withstand the pressure.

The question that is uppermost in one’s mind when discussing these matters is whether this sort of message gets back to the Chief of the Defence Force and via him to the hon the Minister after conferences in this regard have been held? If the message does get through in its correct form so that the critical state of affairs is appreciated, then the people who are involved in passing the information along just cannot understand why some action is not being taken. They know how difficult it is to recreate such a unit, because if they have again to start from scratch, there will be tremendous resistance to those same people coming back to those units.—The hon the Minister is really going to have to prove his mettle by bringing in those men who have been idling away their time and doing nothing—waiting until they are forced to serve before he will be able to succeed in getting these people to come back to assist in the re-establishment of those units. I appeal to the hon the Minister to have a rethink about this whole situation. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for King William’s Town will forgive me if I do not react to his speech. I think he has put his case and I believe that the hon the Minister will react to it in due course.

Just as South Africa is among the leading countries in Africa today in many other spheres, it is also the foremost military power. What makes this remarkable is the fact that a little more than a decade ago, the South African defence force was still small, relatively poorly equipped and understaffed, and its dynamic growth since them has made it the best on the African continent.

As a result of the increasing Russian threat and the arms sanction against us, we were forced to give priority to military preparedness, with the present formidable results. This is not a one-sided and subjective evaluation of our own abilities; one could quote quite a number of military observers abroad in this connection to substantiate this statement. I am referring to the remarks of people such as Sir Walter Walker and Norman Dodd, who are well-know. To their names I may add that of William Cutteridge of the University of Aston in Birmingham. Because of our powerful Defence Force, he states that South Africa is the only African country whose military potential is comparable with that of a middle-ranking force in Europe or North America. Then, of course, there is the director of the authoritative International Institute for Strategic Studies, Dr Robert O’Neil, whose opinion one should take cognisance of. He believes that the predominance of the SA Defence Force in the southern area is such that Russia will not dare to involve the Cubans in a direct confrontation with South Africa in the foreseeable future.

Now the question obviously arises why the SA Defence Force is regarded as such an outstanding force. The first factor in terms of which the capacity of the Defence Force is usually measured is its weaponry, and in this respect there is much that we may be proud of. Thanks to the comprehensive and sustained defence effort of the SA Defence Force in recent years, we possess enormous striking power. With our impressive collection of sophisticated weapons, as well as highly sophisticated electronic equipment, we are well able to hold our own against any aggressor. Another advantage the SA Defence Force enjoys is the fact that a large percentage of its equipment is developed and manufactured by South Africa’s own highly developed military technological industry. Not only is the equipment specifically designed for local conditions, but we also maintain it ourselves, and this is indeed an achievement. It is a well-known fact that during the last few years, South Africa has concentrated in particular on the development of heavy armaments. This is demonstrated by the G5 and G6 artillery systems, the Olifant tank and the Valkiri rocket launchers. Recently, however, we have also introduced a few unique inventions which are far in advance of anything produced even in Europe, namely the Kukri missile system, the smallest laser range finder in the world, and a particularly small and effective night sight.

The fact that the Defence Force is supported by a tried and tested logistic system contributes materially to our capabilities. One cannot omit to refer to the new shipyard complex of the SA Navy, which was commissioned at the end of last year. Here we have taken a great step forward to improve our ability to maintain modern warships and submarines.

Equally important for military effectiveness is training. The Defence Force constantly endeavours to provide all its members with the best possible training. Since 1977, the initial training period has been progressively extended to 24 months. We all know this. However, during that period— this actually applies to all sections of the SA Defence Force—great physical and spiritual demands are made on members of the Defence Force. At the moment the quality of training in the Defence Force is the best it has ever been. When one thinks of the fact that the South African soldier has been operating under difficult operational conditions for more than a decade, and when one looks at the success achieved by that soldier, one probably finds in this the best proof of our high standards of training. This is due to the fact that the staff of the Defence Force are properly trained in the task they have to perform, and that their activities in general are characterized by competence, purposefulness, confidence and success. Moreover, thorough training is probably one of the main factors contributing to the high morale of the members of the SA Defence Force.

Although morale is not quantifiable, it is impossible to over-emphasize the role it plays in the Defence Force in making its members effective, strong and prepared. In spite of the often difficult circumstances under which members of the Defence Force have to operate, as well as the enormous demands made on them, they always show a positive spirit and dedication which is unequalled anywhere in Africa. This spiritual approach contributes just as much as weapons and equipment and training to the success achieved by the SA Defence Force in countering the military threat against our country and its people. While an outsider may provide a defence force with arms and training, that defence force has to rely on its own resources to encourage enthusiasm, dedication and the correct attitude among its people. This is extremely important.

The SA Defence Force finds itself in the fortunate position of having some of the best human material in the world available to it. Their loyalty, perseverance and fearlessness are a credit to all the population groups of our country represented in the SA Defence Force. Just as availability of training and equipment is important, the morale of members of the Defence Force also depends on the extent to which provision is made for their spiritual and physical needs. Here one thinks in particular of the excellent medical facilities and services available in the SA Defence Force. To the soldier in the operational area, and to his family at home—and this is very important—there is no greater reassurance than to know that the best medical facilities and expertise are available immediately and at all times. No other defence force in Africa offers its members so much in the medical, spiritual and material fields. The SA Defence Force is actually a national defence force.

Unlike the defence forces of many other countries in Africa, which include certain ethnic groups from their ranks, the SA Defence Force is composed of members of all the population groups of South Africa. The relations between the population groups in the SA Defence Force are characterized by mutual understanding and respect for language and cultural differences, as well as a spirit of unity and service to the country. In this way, the SA Defence Force is strengthened even further.

In the light of what I have said, Mr Chairman, the SA Defence Force can rightly be described as the best defence force in Africa. However, the fact that the SA Defence Force has proved itself to be the strongest and most effective defence force on the continent of Africa certainly does not mean that less time, energy and money should now be spent on our military capability; on the contrary, we should persevere in our endeavour to remain strong and prepared. However, it remains the ultimate objective of the SA Defence Force to win the peace.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Ladybrand has told us about the power and the ability of the SA Army and how those will be deployed in the event of an attack on us by any aggressor. I want to inform the hon member that the capability and the morale of the SA Army at present are based upon the success of the predecessors of current members of that Army. I am referring now to those who fought in the Anglo-Boer War, in two World Wars, in Korea and in other theatres of war. Therefore, while my hon colleagues deal with the problems of the active and fighting members of the SA Army, I, as a war veteran, and as one who helped restore the Citizen Force in the wake of World War II, want to turn the attention of hon members to those who have served their country well and who are no longer serving.

First of all, Mr Chairman, I want to deal with the establishment of a military veterans’ section of the SADF. It is indeed a pleasure to see the fruits of one’s labour in that a new chapter has been added to the White Paper. That is chapter 3, which deals with military veterans’ affairs.

This is only a beginning for we cannot have our sons and daughters serving their country and earning our praise, and then, when they have completed their service, and when they may even be racked with injury, cast them upon the garbage heap of despair. It is imperative that we should think beyond our excellent medical services through which our serving men and women are restored and nursed back to the highest possible degree of health. However, what do we find when we read the chapter dealing with military veterans? It is devoted almost completely to the dead, to war graves and to rolls of honour, to some degree of housing research in respect of destitute veterans, and also to certain benefits for certain Permanent Force veterans. What about the living for a change?

The hon the Minister should stop introducing legislation into this House which is intended only to cater for periods of active service on the part of the civilians of South Africa. I hope the next Bill he introduces here will have some bearing on the benefits owed to our war veterans.

Let us look at military compensation to injured veterans and let us examine how shoddy and disgraceful our treatment of our injured veterans really is. In 1976 the basis for 100% disablement of a serving soldier was laid down as R300 per month for Whites; R200 a month for Coloureds and R100 per month for Blacks. We are now in 1984. What does a national serviceman receive if he is injured on the border? If he is a White he will receive R467 per month; if Coloured, R312 and if he is a Black, R160. So we have increased the 100% disability allowance from 1976 to 1984 only by 1½. This is a poor show, as we would say in the Army. Why do I say this? Taking inflation at 15% per annum for the last eight years this really should be R970 per month and R1 055 per month in 1985. So in fact at present we are giving him only one half of what he needs to maintain his standard of living in 1984. It is indeed a poor show, to say the least of it.

Let us look at the question of discrimination on the basis of race and colour. Why should there be discrimination here at all? We have lowered the voting age to 18 on the grounds that if a man can fight for his country at 18 he should have a vote at 18. We now say that if a man is prepared to fight for his county, he should receive the same pay, irrespective of colour. But when he is completely disabled, if he was not careful in the choice of his parents and happened to have chosen two Black parents, he is only entitled to one-third of what the serviceman will get who has chosen two White parents although both servicemen may have received their injuries in the same battle against Swapo insurgents on the border during Operation Askari. Discrimination even goes further. There is not only discrimination that is based on colour. What about discrimination between Whites based on jobs? If you are in civilian occupation you get a paltry military compensation if you are disabled. But if you are in the Public Service you can only claim workmen’s compensation, which is far worse, and I hope the Geldenhuys Committee will look at this.

I also want to plead for the elimination of the means test for the veterans of the 1914-18 war. There are not many of them left. Just as the oudstryders were not subject to a means test in their old age, surely the same should now apply to First World War veterans. They probably number only a few hundred.

Let us look at the question of receiving more than 100% disability. Let us take the case of a man who had been wounded in action and loses his eyesight. He is then entitled to 100% disability. But some years later he has to have an arm amputated on account of his wounds. He cannot then be given the additional 14% for the loss of an arm because the law states he is already receiving the maximum. Surely there should be an allowance for increased disability because of multiple injuries sustained. This brings me to the question of passing the buck between Ministers. The hon the Minister of Defence should not now come along and say these matters fall within the ambit of the Minister of Health and Welfare.The latter has passed the buck back to me by saying that that department is merely the administrator of pensions and that the decision to grant a pension is the responsibility of the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Defence. May I suggest that the Minister of Defence take this matter of bringing military compensation under his ambit to the hon the Prime Minister with a view to bringing military pensions under the Minister’s department as soon as possible.

I now want to deal with the SA Defence Force Fund and would like to praise it for the work it has done. It has obtained the bulk of its funds from the Southern Cross Fund. In all the large centres there are committees to assist SADF officers to administer this fund. They consist of representatives of organizations such as the Chambers of Commerce, the SA Legion, Moths, the Southern Cross Fund, Jewish ex-service, league, and a host of others. Its purpose is to assist dependants of serving Citizen Force, commando and national servicemen. It that the wives and children of a man called up for duty and who will not be paid sufficiently for their care, can at least have some peace of mind while serving his country. A great deal of good work is done by this fund.

I would also like to ask the hon the Minister something about the use of SA Defence Force welfare officers in relation to war veterans’ associations. A problem which arises is the question of pensions for military veterans and the investigation of cases. The SA Legion, for example, has done a tremendous amount of work in putting forward applications on behalf of military veterans, particularly even national servicemen who have sustained injuries during campaigns over the last seven or eight years. Those associations, however, are limited in staff. Is it not possible for the SA Defence Force to make its welfare officers available to recognized military veterans’ organizations like the SA Legion? This will allow a proper investigation into an application so as to eliminate leadswingers and charlatans and to ensure that genuine veterans are looked after.

I want to deal with the future role of the Military Veterans Section of the SA Defence Force. These are the sort of things which this new section should be doing, and I trust that the hon the Minister will see his way clear to increasing the staff considerably so that they can help the living in addition to preserving the graves of those who lost their lives in military action in service to their country. There is now a Military Veterans Section of the SA Defence Force without teeth. The hon the Minister must ensure that this section is provided with the necessary powers. It is the duty of the hon the Minister of Defence, as the political head of the Defence Force, to ensure that this is done so that those who serve their country can get the benefits of what they are doing, and not only while they are serving but also when they have finished serving. They must be looked after when they have finished serving.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Bezuidenhout made a plea for the veterans who had served in the Defence Force. I notice that on page 21 of the White Paper, attention is given to this important category under the heading “Military Veterans’ Affairs”. We honour the memory of those who served in the Defence Force as well as those who are still endeavouring today, as ex-servicemen, to bring about a positive attitude towards the SA Defence Force on the part of the public.

I want to convey my sincere thanks on this occasion to the staff of the ministry and the department for the kind and helpful manner in which they assist us in dealing with the problems of our voters. They make our task easier, they make our task very pleasant. We sincerely thank them for that positive co-operation which we receive at all times.

I should like to join previous speakers in thanking the SA Defence Force for its consistently successful defence of our country against attacks from outside over a period of years. I also thank the SA Defence Force for the effective way in which they deal with problems which arise within this country. We thank everyone who has defended and is still defending our country in such an outstanding way.

We also pay tribute to the men who have made the supreme sacrifice for our country. Our hearts go out to their loved ones.

We also want to take this opportunity of conveying to the Defence Force our thanks and congratulations on its major contribution to the success we have recently experienced with regard to peace initiatives in Southern Africa. We are grateful for the fact that the Minister referred to this in his speech yesterday and gave the country the absolute assurance that we would not compromise our preparedness in this process.

Because of the wide range and diversity of the obligations resting on the SA Defence Force and the demands they make on our country’s manpower, the national servicemen are very heavily relied on to act as leaders at various levels. The junior leaders of the SA Defence Force are producing excellent results, in spite of their youth and lack of experience. Their conduct and early exposure to great responsibility is a good investment for the future of the RSA. We are very impressed by and proud of the quality of our junior leaders. Orders and assignments are usually carried out in a very responsible way. The national servicemen who are appointed as leaders are young men who have occupation-orientated professional qualifications, ie degrees and diplomas, but there is another category as well, young men who have come directly from school for their two-year period of service. Those members with recognized professional qualifications who can be used in their specific professions during their period of national service receive a specific basic, formative and professional training of about 16 weeks, as in the case of the SA Medical Services, for example, after which they are used as junior officers in their respective professions. These members are also used in their professional capacity in the Citizen Force division of the SA Medical Services, for example. I am thinking now of medical practitioners, dentists, pharmacists and others.

Matriculated national servicemen, especially those who have received tertiary training which is not specifically occupation-orientated, are enabled to apply for selection to be trained as junior leaders. Selection takes place on the basis of a scientific selection package, as well as personal observation and evaluation during the period of basic training. The purpose of selection is to identify the natural leaders. Sometimes a person proves himself to be a leader during his years at school, sometimes only when he is at university, and sometimes afterwards. Selected national servicemen are trained as non-commissioned officers and officers. The training is aimed at instilling military leadership, command and control skills into the young leaders. During the period of training, the selection process is kept up to ensure that only the best members, who really have the necessary potential for leadership, qualify as leaders. At the moment, the training system is aimed at developing and modulating the individual’s inborn leadership qualities during the first year of national service. During the second year, he gets an opportunity to function as a leader, and then his development is completed in practice.

The following are typical examples of the successful use of junior leaders and the responsibility with which they are charged. In the first place, they are used as training staff. Training at training units is to a large extent entrusted to national servicemen, under the supervision of Permanent Force staff. Another category is command. The services of national servicemen are often used in command posts, such as company second-in-command, platoon commanders, group and squadron commanders, platoon sergeants, section commanders, maintenance platoon commanders, transport platoon commanders, and in several supporting organizations, including logistics, staff and finance sections. The operational success which has been achieved proves the success with which the junior leaders are being trained and used. The responsibility of junior leaders requires them to take decisions during operations which may ultimately mean the difference between life and death. In addition, equipment worth millions of rands is placed in their care.

The high quality of training provides junior leaders with the necessary expertise and skill to enable them to perform demanding tasks with responsibility and authority. On their return, society receives young men who have developed and who have acquired the qualities which they experienced and used during training, and as such they are of great value to society. They are more balanced, rational and responsible than they were when they began their training. They have learned to plan effectively and purposefully, so that they should be able to meet the challenges of life. There is no doubt about the fact that their training and experience in the military environment is of great benefit to their development as good citizens of the RSA. The junior leaders of the SA Defence Force are a good investment for the future of our country.

Mr Chairman, I have only three minutes available to me, and within those three minutes I want to bring three matters to the hon the Minister’s attention.

In the first place, the hon the Minister has an enormous responsibility, as the political head of the SA Defence Force, not to yield to his Cabinet colleagues who think of peace initiatives in Southern Africa in a different idiom, and I appeal to the hon the Minister to be on his guard against people who do not know the military situation in Southern Africa and the world.

Secondly, I want to convey my thanks to the South African Women’s Army College. The history of this college proves that good work has been done there over the years. It is quite likely that there are people, including parents, who have been critical of the institution in some respects, but there is no institution attended by young people which cannot be criticized in some way. I have great appreciation for the staff who have been employed at the college over the years and who are still employed there. Within a short space of time they succeed in developing the positive qualities of young girls who have finished school. What I find particularly striking is the discipline which one finds there. I know there is a lack of funds, but this is an institution which should be properly cared for. We should not hesitate to involve women in the defence of our country in this way. The hon the Minister will agree with me that women, who represent more than 50% of our society, also have a very important role to play under these circumstances. In all likelihood, it would not be practicable to start a second college at this stage. Therefore the existing one should be developed on the foundations which have already been laid. The hon the Minister should keep an eye on it to the best of his ability. It should not be a supervisory eye only. He should help as much as he can, since these young ladies occupy a special place in our society.

Finally, I want to say that I personally have great appreciation for the work done by our chaplains in the Defence Force over the years. They sometimes have to do their work under very difficult circumstances and I want to thank them. It often happens that young clergymen who go to the Defence Force after they have completed their studies have no one to turn to when they themselves experience problems. I should like to suggest that the hon the Minister should look into this matter and should also ensure that there is the necessary parity in respect of the chaplains as well.

Mr Chairman, I am very grateful for the positive contribution of the hon member for Rissik, and particularly for the appreciation he expressed for the training of women in George. He knows, of course, that it was the hon the Prime Minister who initiated that and that he did not always find it easy to have it accepted. Today, however, it is an accepted practice.

I want to say a few words about territorial protection. In that regard we have really made progress since its inception a year or two ago. In my own constituency it has been said that it is impossible for the Defence Force to protect the country as a whole and carry out all its duties and that members of the local population would be placed in a position, by the Defence Force, to protect themselves. It was said that the Defence Force would train them. The launching of territorial protection or extended national service, involving older people as well, has been very successful in Vryheid owing to the positive attitude of that community. I see that at present the Defence Force is engaged in further developments and I want politicians to help the Defence Force with this. If one could have the community adopt a positive attitude towards their own defence, it would be much easier to break down any resistance that such people might have.

In this connection I just briefly want to refer to the Sunday Times of a week ago. In that issue a whole page was devoted to an interview conducted with people in Zeerust about the establishment of extended national service in that area. From that interview it would appear that a large number of the people who are allegedly not supporters of the National Party apparently refused to participate because, according to them, the Coloureds and Asians should carry out that task, because the young people walking the streets should carry out that task and because immigrants should also be defending them. I appeal to the Conservative Party to talk to its people and persuade them to agree to defend themselves. It would be a very good thing for our country. I do not think that people quite understand that what is actually happening is that the Defence Force is helping them to help themselves.

I want to thank the hon the Minister of Defence for having acceded to the request of CP members to visit the border. Before the fiasco of the establishment of the Afrika-nervolkswag took place, the Conservative Party held a congress and could consequently not accompany those who went to the border. The hon the Minister subsequently made special arrangements to take them to the border. There were seven CP members, 4 NRP members, 5 NP members and 17 PFP members who visited the border. Let me say that it was the leftist element in the PFP that went along. They went under the leadership of the hon member for Houghton. Let me say that I have the utmost appreciation for some of the members of the PFP and the CP. Their conduct in the operational area was completely above reproach. I developed a very high regard for the hon member for Pietersburg and for the way in which he conducted himself there—I think he would have had some difficulty if the hon the hon member for Jeppe had been present. And my regard for the hon member for Houghton also increased tremendously. [Interjections.]

There was one person whose conduct not only shocked me, but also hon members in his own party. Some of his colleagues came and told us that they were ashamed of his conduct and questioned it. They subsequently turned their backs on him completely. He was eventually the black sheep amongst them. He assumed the role of indictor of the Defence Force. One can sense that he is no friend of the Defence Force. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member is now raising a matter concerning the private conduct of hon members on a parliamentary tour. As I understand the conventions of this House, one does not raise matters which occurred in private. The hon member is building up to raise a matter relating to some hon member of this party. I believe he should be ruled out of order.

The hon member did not mention any hon member’s name. I am listening very carefully to what he is saying and will interrupt him if he says anything unparliamentary.

Sir, I appreciate that, but I suggest that the reason why he did that was because he was anticipating a point of order.

The hon member for Vryheid may continue.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I should like to ask you to ask the hon member for Vryheid to mention the hon member’s name, because if he does not he is placing all hon members who were on that tour under suspicion.

It seems to me the hon member is trying to waste my time. If one looks at the hon member’s conduct in the House—I shall mention his name in a moment—and the questions he asked in the House about Defence Force matters—I have made a study of that—one sees … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member may not refer to the personal actions and conduct of an hon member outside the House if that has nothing to do with Parliament. The hon member must realize that he is now skating on thin ice.

I shall refer to what happened in Parliament. The hon member, for example, asked a question about whether the South African Defence Force … [Inter jections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member cast a reflection on another hon member who was on that tour. I think it only right that he should mention that person’s name, because otherwise he is placing the entire tour group under suspicion.

Order! I cannot compel the hon member to mention another hon member’s name. The hon member himself indicated, however, that he would be mentioning the hon member’s name. We must therefore give him an opportunity to do so. The hon member may continue.

Here it is a matter of the attitude adopted. I have previously said that all parties are displaying a positive attitude in regard to Defence Force matters and are furnishing a positive contribution in that regard. This year the hon member asked whether the South African Defence Force had received requests from the Republic of Venda to help with the building of gallows. The impression that is thereby created is that people in the Defence Force are a bunch of murderers and that they must help erect gallows in Venda for people to be hanged. That is the question asked in this House.

The hon member also asked other questions of the hon the Minister of Defence who supposedly took people from Modderfontein to the border because they had allegedly helped him in the election campaign. He repeatedly asked questions about that.

He also asked questions about a national serviceman who lost his life at Heidelberg. The impression I gained from that was that he held the Defence Force responsible for his death, although the post-mortem proved the contrary. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The questions to which the hon member is referring were put by the hon member for Cape Town Gardens. The hon member for Vryheid does not have the courage to mention the hon member’s name. [Interjections.] Is an hon member entitled to suggest that a question put in good faith in this House presumes what the hon member deduces, namely that the hon member for Cape Town Gardens holds the Defence Force responsible for the death of a trainee at Heidelberg?

Order! That is not a point of order. The hon member for Pietermaritzburg North also may not say that the hon member does not have the courage to say something. The hon member must please withdraw that.

I withdraw that, but I hope the hon member will have the courtesy to mention the name of the hon member to whom he is referring.

Order! The Chair is not in a position to compel the hon member to do so. That is in the hands of the hon member himself. The hon member for Vryheid may proceed.

Mr Chairman, it was the hon member for Cape Town Gardens. He is the one I am talking about. We were all ashamed of his conduct both within and outside the House. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Vryheid has deliberately set out with the intention of smearing the hon member for Cape Town Gardens in unparliamentary language. That is precisely why he refused to name the hon member for Cape Town Gardens when he began to launch this attack on him. [Interjections.]

Order! As far as I am concerned the hon member for Vryheid did not, in the course of his speech, use any unparliamentary language or any unparliamentary expressions in regard to any hon member of this House, and that is why I did not ask him to withdraw anything either. Even the fact that he now concedes that he has been referring to the hon member for Cape Town Gardens, makes no difference to the situation. I am sorry to have to inform the hon member for Vryheid, however, that his time has now expired.

Mr Chairman, I should like to congratulate hon members of this House on the general standard and calibre of the contributions which they made here during the discussion of this Vote. I find it gratifying that the standard of debate during the discussion of this Vote was so high. I think it was in fact even higher than the standard last year; and last year’s standard was very good.

I always find it pleasant to listen to the hon member for Vryheid. He knows the Defence Force inside out. He also knows the circumstances he is talking about, and in addition he is a very acute observer. I am going to tell hon members why the hon member for Vryheid is such a good observer.

We have established a new area defence system in South Africa. I want to pay the hon member for Vryheid a compliment today. He came to me and told me that the people in his community felt concerned about their ability to defend themselves against terrorist attacks. He wanted to know what the SA Defence Force was able to do in this connection. As a result the Chief of the Defence Force and I went to that area. We held consultations with the town council of Vryheid and with other local leaders. Out of those talks of ours the concept of area defence was born. Today there is a commando unit in Vryheid, which functions very well indeed. To tell the truth, I went there again to see how that unit was functioning. I was very pleased with what I found there.

The members of that unit have in the meantime undergone their training, and I intend going there again in September to see for myself whether that peak level of training, that peak level of efficiency, satisfies the requirements of the SA Defence Force and of our country. I want to give the hon member for Vryheid the credit for having been of assistance to us in this connection.

As a result of what was achieved in Vryheid, we have developed the entire border area accordingly. A certain hon member pointed out yesterday that, somewhere or other, I had spoken about the total onslaught. However, it entails precisely the same facets of motivation which we also applied in regard to people, particularly the potential leaders, of communities which we should like to succeed in involving in the development of a commando system. Consequently I want to make a report today and state that this system is coming into existence everywhere on the border in an effective way. The object is to protect the local inhabitants and to prevent terrorists from infiltrating those areas. I want to reiterate my request that we should not try to drag matters of this kind into the party-political arena. I do not think that that could in any way be to the benefit of the freedom and the security of our country.

Yesterday and today the discussion here in this House really centred around the SA Defence Force. The Defence Force consists of the Permanent Force, the Citizen Force, the commandos, as well as civilians. It includes members of all population groups in the country, men as well as women. A great deal was said, and suggestions were also put forward in regard to Armscor and the members of that body.

By way of summary I can say that the general impression I got from the contributions made by members of all the political parties here in this House was that what they had to say about this big defence family was complimentary throughout. I therefore want to thank all hon members who complimented the Defence Force very sincerely for doing so. What is important to me is the fact that those compliments were not merely a perfectly normal buttering-up process, but that they contained a sincere message for the defence family; a message that amounted to this, that they had been successful in their task, that they had attained their object, that we were proud of them and that we wanted them to keep up the good work. When we discuss the SA Defence Force and Armscor, it is very important to realize that it is not the Government’s Defence Force and the Government’s Armscor, but that it is this Parliament’s Defence Force and this Parliament’s Armscor.

However, we must also take cognizance of the circumstances under which this defence family is carrying out its successful task. These are circumstances which necessitate a great many sacrifices, which entail activities that take place over long periods of time in isolated places. This puts me in mind of an overseas general whom I once met. I took him on a visit to the operational area in South West Africa. Upon his return he told me that if his country had had that problem, they would not have made a success of it. I then wanted to know from him why he had said that, to which he replied: “We, the British, would never have sent families out there. We would have allowed the husbands to go out there alone, and would then have relieved them periodically”.

Although those people frequently have to do their work in remote places, their wives and children, as well as their other close relatives, are equally prepared to contribute their own share. That is precisely why we have achieved this wonderful success, which we are at present achieving in the sphere of security. The circumstances there are difficult, and the places in which people are active, are remote. Consequently it is not always very easy. Sometimes it even calls for blood, sweat and tears. But that is why this Parliament is so proud of the defence family. Those people are making an outstanding contribution.

Moreover, they face tremendous challenges. In this respect we need only think of the wide spectrum of the activities of the SA Defence Force, and of all the places in which the Defence Force has to be active. Then, too, there is the education and the upliftment of a diversity of people and population groups. We think, for example, of Omega, involving what is perhaps one of the most primitive population groups, primarily owing to the typical conditions of Africa. There, too, the Defence Force is performing its labour of love. Members of the Defence Force are performing this task cheerfully and with enthusiasm in order to give the Bushmen, too, his rightful place in the population structure of South West Africa.

I also wish to say a few things about the war itself. I am certain that I have never in my life heard of a country that has been involved in a communist war without having had its nose bloodied even once. That is indeed a remarkable achievement. It is of course as a result of the dedication of people who believe in what they are doing. Those are the people who need the support of everyone in this House.

I can think of numerous other tasks which members of the SA Defence Force have to perform. There is for example the assistance they have to render to governments in remote places. In this respect of course I mean second-tier governments. They help those governments with administration, particularly in East Caprivi and in many other places. They also render medical assistance to people. It is a fact that the medical services of the SA Defence Force are today charged with the overall responsibility for all medical assistance to the people of Ovambo. They were not ready for this, nor had they been expecting it. However, they never said that it was an impossible task for them. They cheerfully agreed to tackle that task and make a success of it. Surely this was a splendid thing to do.

Moreover, I am also thinking of the Defence Force chaplains. Of course I do not want to refer only to the chaplains serving in the Permanent Force. I also include the national service chaplains, and the chaplains in the Citizen Force and in the commandos. These are people who are prepared to go to the operational area every year and minister to their people there; people from a diversity of denominations. They perform this task cheerfully, and go there voluntarily to be of assistance to their people there during the most important time of the year for every Christian, over Christmas-time.

There are many other kinds of work that is also entrusted to the Defence Force, work which the Defence Force is doing successfully, work which the Defence Force is doing in the name of the Republic of South Africa. This brings me to Armscor. This is an organization that was built up by my predecessor; an organization which made its appearance out of the blue, and owing to the abilities and the skills which he harnessed, and also owing to his willingness to see his task through to the end, ensured that today we are in the forefront in so far as the development and supply of weaponry is concerned. In this respect I say thank you very much to the hon member for Ladybrand for the aspects which he raised. I appreciate it very much indeed.

Mr Chairman, when business was suspended I was discussing the defence family in respect of what it had achieved and how we as hon members of this Parliament ought to be proud of the wide spectrum covered by the SA Defence Force. During the debate, mention was made of the great achievements that the SA Defence Force and Armscor, but particularly the SA Defence Force, had accomplished. However, there were also times of adversity, which were also referred to here, but I do not think that hon members should approach these difficult times or troublesome incidents which occurred in a spirit of despondency. I think we should rather come to terms with them and learn our lessons from them so that in future we shall be well prepared if such things should occur again.

I was also discussing Armscor and I had mentioned all the things Armscor had already achieved. I reiterate that Armscor has already achieved a great deal because it arose out of nothing and is today an international leader in the field of armaments as far as sophistication, production and supply are concerned. I think this is an exceptional achievement if we take into consideration the short time in which it has been in existence. After the hon the Prime Minister had effectively reorganized Armscor, it began to produce its real results at the beginning of the ’seventies. Initially it began with the basic development of elementary armaments, and today it is probably producing some of the most advanced weapons systems in the world. In certain areas it is the leader. I am thinking, for example, in terms of artillery and the weapons systems which are being produced. For the Defence Force and for Armscor that are producing these achievements, an occasion such as the discussion of this Vote is of exceptional importance so that they can hear what hon members of this Parliament have to say about their achievements and any aspects which could possibly be improved, because this defence family is receptive to sound criticism. I believe that if it is criticized and the causes of that criticism can be rectified, then it improves its organization. That is consequently their approach in this case, and that is why the discussion of this Vote is so important.

Are those three fellows in Coventry going to get off?

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Pietermaritzburg North always tries to make that kind of flippant remark. He ought to realize, however, that there are people in South Africa who are serving our country under difficult circumstances. I think we should all give all South Africans the required recognition in that connection, and not react so flippantly when some people experience setbacks. [Interjections.] That kind of remark is not worthy of an hon member of this Parliament.

I should now like to begin to react to certain questions that were put to me and to certain points that were raised during the discussion of my Vote. I want to thank the hon member for Wynberg for his positive approach to defence issues. The hon member put a few specific questions to me to which I should like to reply.

In the first place, the hon member referred to the possible need which allegedly existed for a so-called Defence Advisory Council. Since as early as 1912 there has been a provision in the Defence Act that the Minister of Defence may establish a statutory Defence Council. From 1912 until the present time, not a single Minister of Defence has ever appointed such a Defence Council. I am certain there must be good reasons for this, and those reasons probably exist today as well, just as they existed in the past. When the hon the Prime Minister was Minister of Defence, he also had to listen to this request, and Gen Smuts did not see his way clear to appointing one either. In South Africa a statutory Defence Council has never functioned. The hon member for Wynberg has again recommended the appointment of such a council now, and I think he said that it should consist of members of this Parliament.

This request originated as long ago as 1972, when the hon member for Durban Point raised it here for the first time, as far as I can remember. When I look at him sitting over there, smiling, I can see very clearly that he set a trap into which the hon member for Wynberg fell.

I do not want to find fault with the arguments of the hon member in so far as he said that goodwill could flow from such a move, but I think one should first look at the existing machinery we have today in the Defence Force, Armscor and the various members of the Defence Force family to establish to what extent and where such a Defence Advisory Council could fit in, if it could fit in anywhere. In the first place—hon members will agree with this—my door is and always has been open and I am ready to listen to hon members problems or give them any advice they want on Defence matters. In fact, a formal liaison procedure between hon members and the Ministry in regard to Defence Force and Armscor matters exist. Secondly, the relations between the Chief of the SA Defence Force, the command structure and the chairman of Armscor and his top management on the one hand and the hon members of the study groups on defence on the other are very sound. In the third place, to keep hon members conversant with and involved in Defence matters, the various Defence study groups are continuously being briefed—the hon member is aware of this and has experienced such briefings personally—and periodic visits are paid to a diversity of Defence Force and Armscor installations.

Here I could refer to the two recent visits which we paid to the operational area, together with hon members from the various parties. Upon their return they all said that it had been very enlightening, that they had learned a great deal and that they had talked freely with the Defence Force, Armscor and myself. This is being done so that there is a constant interaction between hon members, myself, senior officers and, of course, the senior managers of Armscor on Defence matters.

In the fourth place there are various other liaison organizations that provide the SA Defence Force with advice, and where problems are eliminated. Here I should like to refer to the Defence Manpower Liaison Committee, which functions under the Chief of Staff: Personnel. One could profitably read about this in the White Paper. There are also media liaison committees. The latest addition is the Army’s Manpower Liaison Officer System that was introduced since last year. This Manpower Liaison Officer System will possibly be expanded to the other sections of the Defence Force.

The latter system consists of senior Citizen Force and Commando officers with the specific assignment of taking care of the problems of part-time soldiers. These officers serve on the personal staff of the Chief of the Army, and have representation on the Command Council of the Army. Consequently they also have a say in the formulation and implementation of Army policy.

At Armscor and its subsidiaries there are, moreover, the various boards of directors consisting of eminent industrialists and businessmen who are making a tremendously constructive contribution. I want to thank them in particular for the labour of love they are performing for our county.

In the SA Defence Force there are the following bodies that are, with expert individuals of outstanding calibre, making the necessary contributions: In the first place there is the Defence Planning Committee which is responsible for long-term planning, the allocation of funds, the determination of priorities and the initiation of the main projects. These main projects are planned over a time scale of the next 20 years or more. One therefore finds that the SA Defence Force is not only planning from day to day; it is also planning over the long term. Here the question of determination of needs also arises. The hon member for Durban Point said that preference should be given to the SA Navy, while the hon member for Wynberg said that preference should not be given to the SA Navy, but rather to the SA Defence Force and to early warning systems. If the hon member for Wynberg had wanted that to be a top priority today, he should have formulated it 20 years ago, because he should have known that this would have been the case at this stage.

The only problem is that I am too young.

I do not think the hon member is wrong in thinking that it should receive priority today, but perhaps not such a high priority.

It is here that this type of planning takes place. The Chief of the Defence Force, the command structure, the top management of Armscor, as well as representatives from the private sector are involved in the Defence Planning Committee. Then, too, there is the Defence Command Council, the Defence Staff Council and the Financial Committee. What is interesting is that the Chief of the Defence Force went so far as to give the Treasury representation on the Financial Committee. The Treasury is therefore involved from the start in the planning of and the allocation of funds for the needs over a 20 year period. To my mind this is very important. The hon member for Wynberg said that we should count every penny, and I agree with him, and as far as planning is concerned, we must begin with sound financial planning. All those involved in this are top bodies which function on a high level, and perform extremely effective and important tasks in the defence context. To ensure further that the approved funds are authorized and spent correctly, there is of course the Auditor-General, who has staff in the defence family, the Treasury and of course the Select Committee on Public Accounts of Parliament. I think that Parliament has an adequate say in this connection.

We have also experimented with the establishment of non-statutory advisory bodies, but they did not justify the time spent on them by the people that were appointed to them, and for that reason they were subsequently abolished. My door is always open to hon members to make proposals in order to facilitate the task of the defence of our country. They are always welcome.

If hon members wish to come to me with a proposal for a Defence Advisory Council, however, they must spell out the objectives of such a council clearly in their proposal, so that I shall know where, in this multitude of committees and councils, such a council has a task to perform. We must make very certain that we are not causing duplication, thus harming existing organizations which are functioning effectively.

I am not prepared to accept an advisory council consisting of members of Parliament, and I should like to furnish my reasons for saying this.

In the first place defence is the responsibility of the Government of the day, and as an instrument of the Government the SA Defence Force has to carry out its policy religiously. I say “carry out”, not propagate. This principle, however, does not include the establishment of such a council. Let us consider the practical side of the matter. In this connection I should like to put a question to the hon member for Wynberg. Of whom should this council consist? Should this council consist of the hon member for Wynberg, the hon member for Jeppe, the hon member for Cape Town Gardens and the hon member for Durban Point? If I think in terms of what happened here yesterday, I just want to say that I would not want to be the chairman of such a council. The hon member for Wynberg said that he foresaw an integrated SA Defence Force. The hon member for Jeppe, however, said that he wanted to see various Defence Forces. Hon members do not even have the same point of departure, and how is a defence advisory council going to function if its members do not have the same point of departure and there is no unanimity on the composition of such a council. Who is going to provide the funds for such a council? Such a Defence Advisory Council is still-born. I do not wish to offend hon members, but I should just like to draw their attention to the deeply-rooted differences in the points of departure of members which are illustrated here every day. It is in that spirit that I am saying this.

Defence is a national matter, and I want to assure all hon members that I gladly leave my door open to them, and that they also have free access to the Chief of the SA Defence Force through my office in regard to all matters they wish to discuss or bring to our attention. Such an informal approach is far more beneficial to all of us than a formal organization, which augurs nothing but conflict and does not really have a task to perform.

†Many a word has already been spoken in this House and from other platforms regarding the total onslaught against the RSA. I do not wish to go into detail on this subject, except to say that the Government’s views are based on evaluated intelligence. I do not know on what facts the hon member for Wynberg, the hon member for Edenvale and the hon member Prof Olivier base their views on this matter. The hon members are of course free to differ from me, the Government and the SA Defence Force in regard to the form in which the threat manifests itself, ie be it conventional, unconventional and with or without Soviet support. Although the hon member for Edenvale made a number of valid points, I cannot agree with him that overestimating the threat could be dangerous. However, I agree with him that a balanced view is preferable, but when a country’s future is at stake, one must ensure that adequate planning is made for a possible war.

*The hon member for Wynberg referred to the priorities in our defence expenditure, and made specific mention of the Air Force and the Navy. The separate parts of the Defence Force are not viewed in isolation. In the nature of things, the SA Defence Force should be viewed as a whole so that a balanced Defence Force can be established to repel the onslaught and to complete its task successfully. The acquisition of certain types of armaments requires a lengthy preliminary process. For example, programmes for the purchase of ships and aircraft cannot be changed arbitrarily without this giving rise to fruitless expenditure. To give hon members an idea, I want to refer to the preliminary process leading up to the R1 rifle. From the time the need for it was determined until the first prototype was produced, a period of five years elapsed. It will take 10 years before the Defence Force is equipped with the G5 gun. We are therefore dealing with lengthy preliminary processes, and we cannot change direction unless it is absolutely essential. Nevertheless, priorities are examined to ensure that available funds are applied as effectively as possible in combating the prevailing threat.

I agree with hon members that the West has a material interest in the safeguarding of the Cape sea route. We have shown our willingness to make our contribution by developing Simon’s Town into the largest and most modern naval harbour in Africa. I think the hon member for Randfontein also referred to this. Unfortunately this realization has not yet penetrated to these Western countries so that they are prepared to abandon the existing arms sanctions against us or to use Simon’s Town to make the Cape sea route safer.

I now wish to refer to the remarks made by the hon member for Standerton, who is also chairman of the National Party’s Defence study group. Yesterday he proved himself to be an exceptional Parliamentarian. A Minister of Defence can hardly expect stauncher support than I have been given by the hon member during the few years I have managed this portfolio, and I want to thank him for it. I should like to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the hon member towards those members of the SA Defence Force who are drawn from the other population groups and who fight shoulder to shoulder with the Whites against our common enemies.

The hon member also expressed his appreciation for the Chaplains’ Service and for the work being done by them in respect of the spiritual ministration to our troops. I should like to associate myself with this, and extend my sincere thanks to all the church denominations that are prepared to don a uniform with the one purpose of building the Kingdom of God on earth.

The hon member also asked that the salaries of the Chaplains’ Service, as a professional group, be brought on a par with other professional groups in the Public Service. I did not know that he had so much influence, but I have just heard, and with gratitude, that such a request has already been dealt with and that the new salary scales were approved this morning by the Commission for Administration. I therefore want to thank the hon member for the representations he made in this connection.

Armscor—and this is in fact very important when we are dealing with the Chaplains’ Service—does not merely manufacture instruments of death and destruction. I am certain my hon friend on the opposite will be pleased to hear that Armscor has also initiated a project aimed at raising funds for the Bible Society in order to meet the needs of the SA Defence Force. I want to express my gratitude to businessmen and companies that have already contributed R70 000 towards the “Bibles for Soldiers” project. I truly think that this is a splendid project, and I want to compliment Armscor on it, and thank the businessmen sincerely for their financial support.

The hon member also referred to the history of the modern form of onslaught to which the Republic of South Africa is being subjected, and indicated how it had originated just before the Second World War. I am grateful to him for that, because one sometimes forgets that such concepts have come a long way and did not have their origin here in the Republic of South Africa, but outside the Republic of South Africa.

In his well-known and effective way the hon member also made the point that the threat against the Republic of South Africa was in reality no upsurge of emotion. We are sometimes inclined to forget very quickly. For example, it was only a year ago, in the dying moments of the Defence debate, that the ANC treacherously set off the Church Street bomb explosion. Even if it does become blurred in our memories, we dare not forget it.

The hon member for Standerton also referred, with contagious enthusiasm, to the way in which the South African people support its Defence Force. Such enthusiasm and support is a great comfort to every Defence Force, and an exceptional incentive to even greater dedication. I want to thank him in particular for his contribution.

The hon member for Kroonstad simply cannot rid himself of his background. He must always refer to the Air Force, and this time he even boasted of having served with the Chief of the Air Force, Gen Earp. Yesterday the hon member did this House a favour—and I have no doubt that there are few hon members who will not agree with me—by effectively dealing with that hon member who was no credit to this House, nor to the dignity of this House. The hon member concerned said yesterday that we had an agreement that we could attack one another, but that we would keep the Defence Force out of the political arena. I was not aware of any agreement to attack one another. What I said to him was that he was free to attack me. After what happened yesterday, after the accusations and the tirade we had to listen to, I want to say that I have no intention of descending to that level. Consequently I do not deem it necessary to react any further to what was said. All the accusations that were made were investigated by a judicial commission. In addition, debates have been conducted on the matter and replies furnished to the questions that were put. Consequently, I consider the matter closed.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon the Minister?

No, Sir, that hon member had his chance.

I should very much like to come to the hon member for Durban Point, who made a very good contribution.

You are too afraid to do your work.

Order! The hon member for Jeppe may not accuse another hon member of being afraid to do his work. The hon member must withdraw that.

I withdraw it, Sir.

The hon the Minister may proceed.

The hon member for Durban Point’s involvement in defence matters goes back many years, and he has always been a great friend of the Defence Force and of Armscor. I want to thank him for that. As usual, he again touched upon a few matters of current concern, but also produced his quota of “grouses” or “moans”. I take it that in this respect he sided with the soldier, and I want to say that I appreciate it.

†I do not think there is any doubt amongst the hon members of the House or amongst people outside the House that the Citizens Force and the Commandos form the backbone of our Defence Force, with the Permanent Force assuming the indispensable leadership role. A week or so ago I was briefed by the Manpower Liaison Committee of the Chief of the Army—I mentioned them previously. According to them—they are all senior Citizen Force and commando officers—there is a healthy relationship between the Permanent Force and the commando and Citizen Forces. They did not mention any dissatisfaction in respect of the term “camper”. However, I shall direct enquiries to them in this regard.

*I also took cognizance of the hon member’s views on the White Paper. I can understand that it will not be of as much value to him as it is for younger hon members, because he has over the years acquired a wide knowledge of Defence Force affairs.

†The hon member also referred to submarines, Shackletons and helicopters. I wish to assure him that we are well aware of the need for replacements. Feasibility studies have shown that we have the capability to manufacture submarines and helicopters locally. This matter is at present receiving the urgent attention of Armscor. The local manufacturing of maritime reconnaissance aircraft is not economically feasible. We will therefore have to resort to other means to overcome this problem. This matter is also receiving attention.

*I come now to the hon member Mr Vermeulen. I want to address a special word of thanks to him for having chosen the role of women inside and outside the SA Defence Force as his subject. I also want to compliment him on the striking way in which he singled out the important contribution made by the woman behind the soldier, and the woman in uniform, to the defence of our country. I do not think that we know the true worth of the sacrifices made by women, particularly those whose husbands are away from home for long periods of border duty or other duties. The emphasis which the hon member placed on this matter testified, as do all his speeches on defence matters, to a sound understanding of the woman’s position in the Defence Force, and to thorough preparation of his subject.

As regards the establishment of a second women’s training centre in Bloemfontein—I think the hon member for Rissik also referred to this—I can only say that at this stage there is no question of such a second training centre. Should it subsequently be decided, however, to establish another training college, the hon member’s representations will be borne in mind. Our first priority in this connection lies, in fact, in his second request, namely that of adapting the training of young women in George into a more purposeful development of the leadership potential of selected young women, with a view to the more meaningful utilization of those who, after their training period, wish to render further service in the SA Defence Force. It is a pleasure for me to be able to announce that as from next year we shall revert to one intake per annum, in January, of 250 young women. Their training at the college will last for a full year, after which they will be afforded an opportunity of joining the Citizen Force or the Permanent Force. Leadership and formulative training will comprise an important part of their training programme. I hope that prospective university students in particular will avail themselves of this opportunity as a transitional phase between the school and university. The value of the college in this respect has already been demonstrated. I think this also has a bearing on the aspect which the hon member for Rissik broached.

†I fully agree with the views of the hon member for Edenvale on the effect of the peace initiatives on our enemies and that terrorism will increase rather than decrease. I have quoted statistics to prove this. It appears that the hon member’s neighbouring constituency has a healthy influence on his evaluation of the potential of the enemy. [Interjections.] I wish to congratulate him on his keen insight into military affairs and his contribution to this debate. I was really referring to Modderfontein. [Interjections.]

*The hon member for Pretoria West must be congratulated on his contribution to the level of this debate. His theme, namely the fact that the SA Defence Force cares, testified once again to his profound interest in Defence Force matters.

Like the hon member for Kroonstad, he also has a Defence Force background which always tends to manifest itself in the way in which they display their loyalty to the SA Defence Force. This hon member realizes the value of good training for soldiers, and his appreciative remarks on the production capacity of our armaments organizations did not go unnoticed either. His observation that we have a purposeful, decisive and peaceseeking South African Defence Force illustrated those precise qualities for which the Government has such a special appreciation.

I referred to the remarkable achievement of our security forces in waging and winning a war on the basis of a peace-time economy, but a very important factor is that at the same time, with the same financial resources, an armaments industry was built up which made this country self-sufficient. It is truly unbelievable that we have been able to achieve all this with a peace-time economy. I think this is a point which we overlooked in the discussion we had here, and I thought that attention should be drawn to it.

The hon member’s representations that we should all stand together and direct our energies towards developing the Defence Force, could hardly have been more appropriate than in these very times in which a strong Defence Force and an effective Armscor afford the principal assurance that the Government is able to proceed in an enterprising way with new initiatives.

The hon member for De Aar tendered his apology for not being able to be here this afternoon. Once again he addressed this House in a dignified way and meted out well-deserved praise to the SA Defence Force. He also evinced understanding for the nature of the onslaught, and this gives me the satisfaction of knowing that visits to the operational area are not fruitless. The hon member made another very valid point, which was that in this type of warfare the local population should be protected against intimidation at all costs. He also stated certain standpoints on the peace initiatives and the withdrawal of the Defence Force from South West Africa. However, he will not take it amiss of me if I do not react to those standpoints, since the hon the Prime Minister dealt with this matter fully during the no-confidence debate, and also referred to it during the discussion of his own Vote.

The hon member for Bloemfontein North found a very neat way of tying his speech in with the theme of my introductory speech, and elucidated it with his own viewpoint. The gist of his message, namely that South Africa cannot afford to endanger its defence policy through a lack of money, testified to his grasp of the situation. I want to give him the assurance that the Government and the SA Defence Force are mindful of the possibility that terrorist organizations will do everything in their power to try to bedevil the peace initiatives. Consequently it is a pity and perturbing that certain of our media have fallen into this trap of disinformation. I shall return to this matter later.

I thank the hon member for Walvis Bay for the way in which he brought the strategic importance of Walvis Bay to the attention of hon members. The evidence which he gave on the way in which sound attitudes were being cultivated on the part of the SA Defence Force and the population of Walvis Bay was encouraging, and his appreciation for the good work being done by the national service chaplains in particular is highly valued. The hon member also referred to Armscor’s exhibit in Santiago, and I can give him the assurance that Commandant Piet Marais and his team have great appreciation for that. That exhibit was very successful and once again contributed to displaying the ability of the Republic of South Africa.

†I am grateful to the hon member for Mooi River for drawing to my attention aspects of the area bound policy which are causing problems. The exemption board is of course a body constituted and functioning under the jurisdiction of the Department of Manpower for the very purpose of reaching a fair and unbiased decision in respect of military service commitments. Since the introduction of the system 57% of the applications considered by the board have been approved and the applicants declared area bound. There are, however, still 2 255 applications pending owing to insufficient information being supplied. I have, however, requested the Chief of the SA Defence Force to consult with the chairman of the board in connection with the question of a more lenient approach towards area-bound applications.

*The hon member Prof Olivier also made a few valid statements. He said, inter alia, that South Africa must have a Defence Force that is effective and prepared, to enable it to repel every possible onslaught. He also pointed out that money and manpower were not unlimited commodities, and that they must, for that reason, be utilized efficiently. I want to thank him for this. I have already, in my reply to the speech made by the hon member for Wynberg, reacted to the view of this hon member in regard to the comparison of South Africa’s Defence budget with those of other countries. It is a fact that the gross national product is an internationally acceptable norm of comparison for defence budgets. However, I went even further and also used another form of comparison, namely Defence Force expenditure as a percentage of the total State expenditure. Both comparisons demonstrate that the Republic of South Africa is spending far less on defence than would normally be expected. In this respect, therefore, I do not differ with the hon member. Nevertheless, I also want to thank him for the positive things he had to say about the Defence Force and about his visit to the operational area. The hon member Prof Olivier also tendered his apology for not being able to be present here this afternoon.

The hon member for Pietersburg also made use of the opportunity to discuss national service for Coloureds and Indians. I find it such a pity that the hon member should approach this sensitive matter in such a way. Surely the Government and Parliament cannot put the cart before the horse. Surely it would be nonsensical, and also a breach of all ethical principles, to make statements in this House now on compulsory military service in a new dispensation, even before that dispensation has been established. Only when the new dispensation is in operation will people have to decide this matter for themselves. Surely it really is the prerogative of people in the new dispensation to take their own decisions in this regard. Therefore do not let us now, for political reasons, impair this prerogative. When all is said and done, we are all adults, people with a sense of responsibility, and not a lot of emotional opportunists. I have appreciation, though, for the dignified way in which the hon member for Pietersburg put certain standpoints. I differ greatly and in principle with his political standpoint. Incidentally, the hon member for Pietersburg also apologized for not being able to be here this afternoon. The hon member for Pietersburg and I have never tried to make things unpleasant for one another. I also appreciate the way in which he pledged the support of his party to the defence cause.

The hon member for Pietersburg also referred to the implementation of the policy of separate development in the SA Defence Force. I want to put it to the hon member that the Defence Force implements the policy of the Government of the day.

What is that policy?

The policy of this Government is not a policy of integration. Consequently the Defence Force is not implementing such a policy. If hon members have any complaints in this connection, they can always submit them to me. In addition, they can at all times submit them to the Chief of the Defence Force. I made a full statement in regard to this matter when the hon member for Rissik and the hon member for Pietersburg were still sitting on this side of the House. That was in 1981. At the time they were all satisfied with it.

Yes, that was before you accepted power-sharing. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, the situation has not changed in any way whatsoever since that time. I have nothing to add to that either, except the following. I said on that occasion that we should not turn this subject into a political issue. I repeat that with all the responsibility at my disposal by saying that polarization between the colour groups in the realm of defence is tantamount to sabotage. In this country we are not fighting colour. We are fighting an ideology and an enemy who wishes to engulf and defeat us all, regardless of whether we are White, Brown, Yellow or Black. Let us keep this in mind, and not recklessly exploit racial friction, and in that way try to utilize our security forces for petty party-political gain.

The speech made by the hon member Dr Vilonel testified to a lively interest which he acquired over many years in the South African medical services. The medical care of our soldiers and their families is undoubtedly one of the greatest morale builders. I want to thank the hon member for having in particular brought the reassurance to the closest relatives of young national servicemen in the operational area that in field conditions they are assured of the best medical care possible. As the hon member correctly pointed out, the South African Medical Service has a proud record in respect of the treatment of war injuries. Pioneering work has already been done in this respect as, for example, in the case to which he himself referred, the removal of a missile from the body of a soldier a year or two ago.

The hon member for Brentwood, on the basis of interesting statistics, stressed the importance of good leadership training, discipline and teamwork. I should like to thank him for his appreciative attitude and constructive contribution and in particular for his observations in connection with the contribution by the Defence Force to community development in its own ranks and also across the colour line.

The attempts by the hon member for Roodeplaat to join the ranks of the Air Force members in this House, will probably be welcomed by the new Chief of the Air Force. The hon member referred to the high standard of flying safety being maintained by the Air Force. He also broke a lance for a particular piece of equipment which is available to the Air Force. The hon member has always taken a lively interest in the Defence Force, and we are very grateful to him for doing so.

†The speeches of the hon member for Yeoville are always positive and of a very high standard. The point that he made that the motivation of members of the SA Defence Force should receive special attention is a very valid one. I wish to assure the hon member that this matter is already receiving the highest priority at the highest level. The Chief of the SA Defence Force and the Defence Command Council are personally involved.

I have also requested the Chief of the Defence Force to look once again at the utilization of professionally qualified national servicemen. Note has been taken of the hon member’s suggestion that national service training should provide for the acquiring of skills that may be useful in civilian life. I agree with this and hope that the SSB concept can be reintroduced.

With regard to the hon member’s observations regarding our weaponry, I think I have already replied adequately in respect of this vital matter in relation to speeches by other hon members. The hon member is well aware of the problems facing us in this regard as well as of the achievements of Armscor to overcome these problems. The inflow of sophisticated weapon systems into this part of our continent is carefully monitored, and every effort is made to maintain our position of supremacy, including air supremacy. In this regard the hon member also made the very valid point that an army cannot fight without air supremacy.

The SA Defence Force is very sensitive about the spares position not only because an adequate supply is absolutely vital but also because of the high costs involved. Projects have been launched to attend to this aspect, some of which have already produced positive results.

It is always to be appreciated when a colleague, especially one of the calibre of the hon the Deputy Minister of Environment Affairs and Fisheries, takes such an interest in defence matters as to devote some of his precious time to participation in this debate. I want to thank my hon colleague for the manner in which he takes an interest in the well-being of members of the SA Navy and the manner in which he defends any allegations in regard to their morale. As far as the allegation is concerned that I ever suggested that there was a gross breakdown of efficiency in respect of the SA Navy I wish to assure both him and the Navy that I have never used those words or even words that could imply such an idea. I wish to thank the hon the Deputy Minister for bringing this matter to my attention. I should like to place on record the fact that I hold the SA Navy in high esteem and that they will never be neglected materially or morally by my office. After all, it is a fact that my commissioned rank was conferred upon me while I was a member of the Naval Marine Corps.

I think hon members who accompanied me on this visit to the Navy on 31 March this year will testify to the efficiency and motivation of our ships companies. Our maritime defence is no doubt in very good and able hands.

*I appreciate the insight with which the hon member for Randfontein singled out the planned and purposeful efforts of the Soviet Union, particularly in the oceans off our very long coastline. The provisioning of a battle fleet requires an extremely expensive and sophisticated effort. I have already emphasized that heavy burdens would be imposed upon us in ensuring the strategic safeguarding of the whole of Southern Africa. We deserve to receive the support of the West in this protection, particularly if one thinks of the delivery of oil and the guaranteeing of such supplies.

I come now to the aspect which was broached last year, in other words the inquiry of the Hey Committee. It is also appropriate that I convey my thanks today to the members of this committee. That committee succeeded in an excellent way in reconciling the interests of nature conservation and defence in the national interest. The members of the committee really worked and deliberated around the clock to give new hope to the future of the De Hoop nature reserve and the important adjoining area, namely the Overberg missile testing range. In that way a dream for nature conservation came true. I also want to give all hon members the assurance that Armscor and all its entrepreneurs will abide by what is contained in the committee’s report to the letter.

Last year, on the occasion of the discussion of this Vote, I alleged by implication that a well-known nature conservation officer, Mr Morsbach, had leaked information to politicians. Mr Morsbach came to see me and assured me that it had not been he. I accept his bona fides completely. With people who have the knowledge he has, we shall ensure that De Hoop is developed in a scientific way, and is preserved for posterity.

The next point I should like to broach, arises out of questions that were put in this House in regard to misdeeds. I feel compelled to raise this subject. I have in my possession a document which has been freely available since last year. The document contains a complete list of all the misdeeds and alleged misdeeds in which SA Defence Force personnel have been involved during the past three years. I even have here a list of the cases pending against SA Defence Force personnel.

In reply to a question earlier this year I pointed out that there was machinery for dealing with and channellizing, with the help of the local authorities there, any misdeeds committed by the SA Defence Force personnel in the operational area. The local authorities and population must therefore be involved in this matter. I gave further instructions that hon members should be briefed on this matter during their visit to the operational area. I understand that this was comprehensively done, particularly on the occasion of the second visit, especially since those hon members of the PFP who had been interested in this matter, were present on the second visit. This information was then presented to them on the occasion of that visit.

Today I should like to associate myself with the hon member for Yeoville. Patriot that he is, he reacted by requesting that Swapo misdeeds should also be disclosed. I am grateful for that healthy balance in the PFP, and that there are people who in this respect are clearly standing on the other side of the fence and are not simply trying to point out how badly the South African soldier can possibly behave, but also are pointing out the kind of enemy he has to contend with.

I should like to furnish a summary of the statistics. Since 1979 Swapo terrorists in the operational area have abducted 1 361 people, 319 people have been killed by landmines, 388 people have been murdered in cold blood and 539 people injured by landmines. These figures pertain only to the local population. Against this there have, since March 1982, been only 43 cases of misconduct proved against South African soldiers, while a further nine cases are still being investigated. I have a complete list available, and if anyone is interested in it, I shall let him have a copy. I shall let this suffice.

Mr Chairman, in the 10 minutes left to this party, it will not be possible to reply fully to the hon the Minister. However, there are one or two points I want to touch on.

He referred to the slight smile on my face. Yes, I was smiling, because I was remembering the discussions we have had here over the years. I want to make it clear that this party has never sought to have a body comprising the Opposition which would try to run the Defence Force. What I have sought, and hope will come about in the Standing Committee on Defence in the new dispensation, is a forum for confidential discussions. I could give many examples, but I will give only one example of where I think it should have happened and where in fact I initiated such a discussion. Last year I took up the question of detainees held in South West Africa. I obtained all the information I wanted and I was satisfied with it, including the fact that the Red Cross had access and that the inquiries I was getting were in fact coming by way of the Red Cross. I left the matter at that. When it became public recently, I again approached the Defence Force and asked for a further briefing. The chairmen of the groups were brought together and we had a fruitful and to my mind a very satisfactory discussion. What I would like to see, is a regular forum where that sort of matter can be discussed instead of across the floor of the House. All I want to say about it, is that I believe that the Defence Force should make available to the public the information we had. It can do no harm and will remove all rumour-mongering and suspicion, because the more you tell people, and I think we should tell them all that is possible, the fewer rumours there will be and the less mud will stick. What I have always fought for, is a forum for confidential discussion.

There must be a filter in the hon the Minister’s pipeline, because he said that he has had no problem over the matter I raised, which he seemed to treat as something of a petty joke, namely the question of the nickname “camper”. I want to quote from a message from the Commanding Officer of one of our most famous and respected South African regiments to his men after a visit to the border. He said:

He goes on:

That is how seriously a commanding officer takes it, namely that he actually put it in a printed message to his troops. I have had this from unit after unit and I am therefore not just retailing chit-chat or teatime or night-cap moans. This is a matter which has reached the stage when the OC of one of our outstanding units has commented on it. He goes on to say that he wonders whether it is realized what sacrifices are made. Talking about the force that went up, he said:

That is the spirit of our Citizen Force, the spirit in which they approach their responsibilities.

I want to know raise one or two unconnected matters. The first is a hardy annual, and I think this will be my last try. I refer to the group life insurance scheme which was destroyed by the introduction of the new insurance system. Those who had contributed for 20 or 30 years and who had faith in it believing it was an official scheme because it was controlled by their commanding officers, lost virtually a lifetime of contributions. I accept that we have gone through all channels and that there is no official way in which they will get their money back. However, could there not be some sort of ex gratia recognition given to the handful of people who have served the Defence Force well and who have suffered through no fault of their own?

The other hardy annual is the issue of pay. I accept that there has been a vast improvement but there are two problem areas which it seems cannot be corrected. Heaven forbid, the White Paper refers to another F.R.E.D., a flipping ridiculous electronic disaster computer. Please do not get any more Freds because they cause half the trouble. When the pen is used these thing start to improve.

The first problem area is in the Permanent Force. There are delays in payment when a person is promoted or when he earns a special allowance, for example a flying allowance. As soon as his pay changes in any way, it can take months before that pay adjustment is made to his cheque.

The second problem area is with national servicemen when they change units or change their normal routine and are attached to different sections. I want to pay particular tribute to the Chief of the Defence Force and his personnel for the fantastic way in which they deal with these queries. They take them up immediately and solve the problems. Sometimes people battle for more than a year and in one case a person battled for nearly two years to get his pay through his unit.

This is where the third problem arises. When a matter is put to the complaints office or taken up by the unit and treated as a query, it somehow does not get into the pipeline. However, when the Chief of the SADF takes it up, the matter is settled very quickly. There are therefore still problems. I appreciate the action which has been taken but I receive these reports continuously.

The other matter which I complained about and to which the hon the Minister did not refer, is referred to in the same newsletter and I receive complaints from all over. This regards the resentment on the part of certain people who see their service in the Defence Force as being an 8 to 4 office job and do not get involved in the same way as 98% of the dedicated people do.

I want to refer to another minor irritation, but it is amazing what an effect it has on families. When a man is called up, a troop train is laid on and he is brought to his departure point where he has to report and everything is looked after. However, at the end of his two year stint, particularly the group finishing service in December, he is virtually left to find his own way home. He is issued with a rail warrant but is usually told that the trains are fully booked. I concede that special permission is granted to most of them to get away before Christmas. Some of them have to stay there for the Christmas period but most of them are released to be home in time for Christmas. However, they can not get home because the trains and the ’planes are full, they are not allowed to trade their rail warrant as part of payment for an air fare and so they hitch. I receive complaint after complaint. I have taken some up and something has been done about them. However, one usually hears about this after Christmas when it is too late. I think the same attention should be given to getting men home at the end of their service as is given to getting them there to start their service. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Durban Point addressed the few matters he touched on directly to the hon the Minister, and I shall therefore not react to them. I think the hon the Minister will reply adequately to them.

I wish to avail myself of this opportunity to say thank you for the channels that have been created for us as representatives of the people to bring up problems. I am also grateful for the fine, courteous manner in which our problems are heard and are always given prompt attention and solved. I really do appreciate this.

The Defence Force is usually thought of as a military force ready for war and the suppression of terror and everything that goes with that. Primarily, it is also the Defence Force’s task to safeguard the country against attacks from across its borders and against invasions, as well as to counteract terror and other onslaughts and incitement to terror. Today, however, I want to turn the picture around a little and refer to the “good” side of the Defence Force’s activities. By this I do not wish to suggest that the Defence Force does not have a good image with regard to its other activities. Let me rather speak of the softer image of the Defence Force’s activities. Some Opposition members, as well as the Opposition Press, refer a great deal to the Defence Force as being so-called brutal, an oppressor and the like. However, if one takes note of the peace task the Defence Force is performing domestically, and of the service it renders to civilians, one wonders if it is always brought to the attention of the public sufficiently and whether the public is adequately informed about what our Defence Force achieves in peacetime. In this regard I wish to refer to a few domestic matters and specifically to the efficient and conscientious action of the Defence Force during natural disasters. The Defence Force is also always prepared to act immediately in this regard. For example, I refer to Domoina which recently struck the northern parts of Natal, Zululand, Swaziland and those areas. I also want to mention what we experienced only this week in the Western Cape and how promptly the Defence Force was available to provide tents and food and to assist with the necessary services. Above all—I had personal experience of this when a disaster struck part of my constituency—I want to refer to the sympathetic and efficient way in which the Defence Force acts. This creates confidence, and it also gives the victims courage when they know that there are people who will give the necessary guidance, assistance and support and who will also assist them with auxiliary services in all respects. We have had water and grazing delivered promptly in drought-stricken areas. As a farmer who has also found myself in those circumstances, I also want to express my gratitude and appreciation to the Defence Force for this. They often have to work in very difficult circumstances, for example, when there are not proper roads.

I now want to turn to South West Africa, where the Defence Force has a mammoth task at present. A very fine project is being tackled at the Omega Base. It is being led by a very young, capable and idealistic commander. I believe that it was a revelation to each one who was privileged to visit Omega to see what is being achieved there. Then, at the same time, I wish to pay tribute to the women in the SA Defence Force, as has been done on various occasions. I refer specifically to the women at Omega and their task of educating the adult Bushman women there. Bushmen women are trained to be self-sufficient and self-supporting. A mammoth task is being performed there. The Bushmen children are also being educated. They are taken on tours so as to become familiar with the rest of South West Africa, but they are also kept in contact with nature, in which their primary interest lies, as well as their importance to the SA Defence Force as trackers.

Another matter I wish to touch on is the medical service. If one were to withdraw the medical service of the SA Defence Force from the vast expanse of Ovamboland today, there would be no other medical service available to those people. It is very difficult to estimate the value of what is being achieved there.

Thus there are various fields in which the SA Defence Force plays a role in South West Africa. Apart from the infrastructure the SA Defence Force is creating there, there is scarcely any field in which one could move in South West Africa in which one would not find the hand of the SA Defence Force.

The SA Defence Force supports the Department of National Education in the development of the youth by arranging athletic and other meetings, in which 8 428 pupils from other population groups have been involved during the past year. In co-operation with the Department of National Education, the Defence Force assists in the drawing up and implementation of literacy programmes, for the young Black members of the South West African Territory Force as well. It has also undertaken a development and literacy programme in co-operation with the Academy for Tertiary Education for Adults, as well as to try to bring national servicemen in South West Africa up to a predetermined scholastic standard.

I have already mentioned the tremendous task that is being fulfilled amongst the Bushmen. If the SA Defence Force had not taken this population group under its wing and started training them, they would probably have been totally annihilated today. This is what the Defence Force is doing, in contrast to what is often said it is supposedly doing. The Defence Force has saved what is left of a unique people and seen to it that it can continue to exist.

The Defence Force also performs tasks with regard to agriculture in that area. In addition, the Defence Force is involved in church and youth organizations. For example, it assists in the provision of transport and tents at the DR Mission Church at Khomasdal. National servicemen are also involved in school projects. During the past year almost 6 000 pupils were involved. The Defence Force is therefore carrying out a tremendous programme of education and upliftment.

The Defence Force also assists in the development of agriculture in South West Africa. For example, it assists the local inhabitants in breeding different breeds of cattle and in dosing. We who have visited the area realize that there is a vast fallow field in this sphere. Agriculture remains of primary importance to any people, since it has to be able to feed itself, thereby assisting to preserve domestic peace. The Defence Force plays a tremendously important role in this field as well.

I referred earlier to the role the SA Defence Force plays in the medical field, not only in Owambo, but also in the entire area, thereby increasing the expectations of those people tremendously. The Defence Force also performs an enormous task in the field of veterinary services. During the past year more than 200 national servicemen were actively involved in these programmes of upliftment and guidance.

Members of the Territory Force also serve on various committees where they give local authorities information and guidance.

Due to a lack of time, I unfortunately cannot refer to all these matters in detail. However, I wanted to give a brief outline of the other side of the Defence Force which is often not noticed, but which is equally essential and important in bringing about and perpetuating peace and stability not only in South West Africa, but also inside South Africa itself.

Mr Chairman, I take pleasure in rising to speak after the hon member for Beaufort West. [Interjections.]

On this occasion I should like to speak about the involvement of people of colour in our Defence Force and the contribution they make to the defence of our country. There are many critics in this country who question the role of people of colour in the Defence Force. To them I want to say that under the new dispensation the Coloureds and the Indians will have an opportunity to give their views on this matter. It is not for me to make a pronouncement on their behalf. Then there are those who say that the Government uses people of colour in the Defence Force to introduce systematic integration into the SA Defence Force. I want to tell them that it is only the ignorant who try to cause trouble and to sully sound relations by making such pronouncements. The involvement of people of colour in the SA Defence Force dates back to the early days of colonisation and was perpetuated over the years without any population group feeling that it was being threatened by another population group within the context of the Defence Force. For example, the Coloureds served as labourers in South West Africa during the First World War. A Coloured Corps was established during the Second World War to meet the demand for manpower on the various battlefronts. Coloureds were used in East Africa, North Africa and even in Europe. A Coloured Corps Auxiliary Service was established in 1950, whilst the SACC—the SA Coloured Corps, which is the SA Cape Corps today—was established in 1963 as a unit of the SA Defence Force. Today the SACC consists of three units, amongst which is a fully-fledged infantry battalion, whilst young Coloured men have been able to undergo voluntary military training and do border duty since 1973.

The Indians, too, made their contribution during the First and Second World Wars, and in 1975 the Indian Corps was established in Durban, where young Indian men can serve on a voluntary basis.

The Black people also rendered an important auxiliary service during the First and Second World Wars. A training centre for Black soldiers was established at Baviaanskloof in 1974. It was renamed 21 Battalion in 1975, and shortly after that some of its members began their infantry training with a view to active service in the operational area. Black people are also used in the auxiliary service’s non-combatant unit, whilst Black people who form part of the combat element of the auxiliary service are trained as infantrymen and are to be found at regional units in the national states. In this way the SA Defence Force is involved in the establishment and expansion of the defence forces of these states.

Mr Chairman, history proves that the criticism received from all quarters in respect of people of colour in the Defence Force is unfounded. For a very long time people of colour have had a sense of responsibility and loyalty towards their country, and people who make irresponsible statements about the presence of people of colour in the SA Defence Force are not promoting a positive attitude.

The Coloureds and Indians can do voluntary service for a period of two years and they can also join the Permanent Force. Coloureds are used in all four sections of the Defence Force, whilst Indians are used mainly by the SA Navy. Each year twice the number of Coloureds and Indians volunteer for service than the SA Defence Force can accommodate. Selection takes place mainly on the basis of academic qualifications, medical fitness and security classification.

As regards the Permanent Force, three times as many Coloureds, twice as many Indians, and six times the number of Blacks than it can accommodate apply. These figures apply to the period July 1982 to April 1984. Many of these people are therefore turned away, due mainly to a lack of posts. However, this is proof that the people of colour in our country have such a high regard for the SA Defence Force that some are even prepared to make in their career. I could also point out that today 25% of the Permanent Force is manned by people of colour. Since 1974, 25 people of colour have already died on the border in the service of the Republic of South Africa as members of our Defence Force, whilst 79 such members have also died in other ways in the service of the country. As regards the training of people of colour in the SA Defence Force, it should perhaps be mentioned that basic training takes place in separate groups. Where possible, individual and advanced training is offered at the training centres of the population groups concerned. Where limited numbers, a lack of facilities and insufficient training staff do not justify it, those people receive their training at senior training institutions.

The services of people of colour are used as and when they are needed by the Defence Force. The staff policy of the SA Defence Force is based on the philosophy that the responsibility for the defence of the Republic of South Africa against military onslaughts rests with all its inhabitants, within the confines of existing statutory provisions and regulations. Within the scope …

[Inaudible.]

The hon member for Rissik should rather keep quiet. Perhaps he will learn something this afternoon. [Interjections.] Within the scope of this philosophy, taking Government policy, military custom and local circumstances into account, it is the policy not to differentiate between members of the Defence Force on the basis of race, religion, language or sex.

Mr Chairman, I should like to devote the last part of my speech to the question of what the Defence Force means to our fellow-countrymen of colour. In this regard I just want to refer to a few matters. The military service those people do bring them into contact with discipline and authority, which is essential to everyone in today’s society. They cultivate an attitude of neatness and pride. At many of the bases, for example, at 21 Battalion, the SACC’s training centre at Eerste River, and at the Black regional units, there are centres for adult education where these members of the Defence Force are given the opportunity to improve their qualifications in the academic field. The development of leadership potential takes place by training members as leaders if they have the necessary aptitude and potential.

Whom are you quoting now?

He does not commit plagiarism, Daan.

They are also exposed to Western culture in the training process. In turn, this gives rise to an improvement in their norms and standards. Military service and training also means that a more adult and more disciplined person is entering the labour force.

Mr Chairman, may I put a question to the hon member?

Mr Chairman, my time is extremely limited. I shall reply to a question from the hon member for Jeppe for pleasure. However, I first want to complete my speech. [Interjections.]

To those who have done voluntary service for two years and who have undergone training in certain fields of study, that training in the Defence Force means a great deal in later life. This is really very beneficial because it enables them to sell themselves in the labour market from the outset.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member for Standerton claimed that we on this side of the House had committed plagiarism.

Not on that side of the House; you did. [Interjections.]

Order! Did the hon member for Standerton accuse the hon member for Rissik of having committed plagiarism?

No, Mr Chairman, I did not.

Of course you did. [Interjections.]

Order! What, then, did the hon member for Standerton say to the hon member for Rissik?

Mr Chairman, I was referring to the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke, who is making his speech at present, and said that he had not committed plagiarism.

Like whom? [Interjections.]

Order! The hon member for Schweizer-Reneke may proceed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Rissik is trying to waste my time now. [Interjections.]

The fact is that people of colour in South Africa recognize all the benefits I have mentioned. That is also the reason why the SA Defence Force is inundated with applications every year. I want to thank those people who display their love for their fatherland by reporting for military service. I also believe that there will be an even greater interest in the defence of our country once the new dispensation has been put into operation. I therefore want to request that, as far as possible, the hon the Minister should try to find ways and means of accommodating that group of people who report for voluntary service.

Finally, I should like to refer to a matter which is not really directly related to the Defence Force. However, it has a bearing on an announcement made by the hon the Minister last year with regard to making Defence Force land available to farmers in the drought-stricken areas of South Africa. They made 216 000 ha available to these farmers, and 15 000 head of cattle and 38 000 sheep were accommodated on that land. That was from last year until now, and some of them are still grazing there. On behalf of the farmers who have made use of this grazing, I want to thank the hon the Minister most sincerely for this assistance he gave them. It enabled those farmers to retain many of their most important herds.

Mr Chairman, we in the PFP have always been mindful of the fact that history has shown that no free nation has even been known to profit from military weakness. We therefore support— and we have said so repeatedly—the concept of a strong military shield for South Africa behind which peaceful politics can proceed. However, this must not be confused with blank cheque support because it will always be our role as a loyal Opposition to offer critical comment on the funding, deployment and operating policies of the Defence Force. We see it as our duty and our right to offer criticism. We have done so in the past and we shall do so again. However, in all fairness, constructive opposition also means that in addition to criticism one has to take note of those things that require positive comment, and it is in this spirit that I wish to refer to the question of the De Hoop Nature Reserve and the Southern Cape missile test range.

It would appear to me in connection with this matter that there is some good and some bad news. In the first instance it must be noted on the positive side of the scale that Armscor enjoys a prideful place in the eyes of the South African public. It has earned respect for its remarkable achievements in provisioning our military forces in the face of daunting obstacles and for having demonstrated resourcefulness in adversity. For this Armscor deserves support.

The second positive aspect of the De Hoop affair was the appointment by the Government of the environmental impact study commission. While it must be said that it was unfortunate that there had first to be a public outcry before this body was appointed, a public outcry led by the PFP, it must be said that it was to the credit of the Government that they responded with the appointment of this specific commission. This has established a very important precedent in South Africa in that it has established a model for the role of an environmental impact study in such cases.

A third positive aspect is that the Hey Commission has made an important contribution—the hon the Minister also referred to this—to the public awareness of the importance of the De Hoop region. It has also detailed the necessary measure upon which a sound management policy for the region must be based.

In the fourth instance it must also be said that at face value the categorical assurances that have been provided by Armscor are encouraging. Finally, the fact that De Hoop is to increase in size and that the environmental managerial expertise of the Cape Provincial Administration is to be employed must also be welcomed.

However, on the other side of the scale I feel it is necessary to make the following observations. Firstly, it would appear to me that the most revealing section of the report of the Hey Commission is section 12.3 which is to the effect that had there been any feasible alternative the commission would have preferred to see the area conserved as a nature reserve to protect the natural systems in perpetuity. This reveals the fact that the commission agreed to subordinate its environmental preference for the area in favour of military considerations in what they referred to as the national interest. The commission reaches this decision on the basis of what it describes as secret military information which the public at large is left to accept on trust. In this way the commission has advised the public that it was presented with classified military information which led it to the conclusion that there was no possible alternative. It must also be said that it is most unfortunate that public acceptability of the commission’s conclusions rests upon an acceptance of the claim that there was no alternative. I am sure that in this connection most South Africans share with me a sense of resigned acceptance that if indeed there is no alternative to a classified defence priority which is unavoidable, then so be it, although we should somehow try to minimize the environmental impact of this development. However, this basic assumption was not universally accepted without some degree of scepticism. This scepticism was well expressed in a letter to Die Burger of 20 December 1983 which was headlined “Kwelvrae oor De Hoop”. It was written by Ontevrede, Stellenbosch.

*“Ontevrede” writes that he does not find the findings and recommendations convincing at all and he reacts as follows:

The first question is:

I know this practice is also followed in die USA. His second question is:

The third question is:

I feel that these questions are very pertinent and deserve an answer from the hon the Minister.

†The second point that must be mentioned on the other side of the scale is that if this development goes ahead as indicated, the public’s access to the area is going to be very greatly restricted, particularly its access to the wonderful stretches of beach between Waenhuiskrans and Cape Infanta. I refer here to the hon the Minister’s reply to my question on 7 March.

The third aspect that needs to be looked at is the fact that while the report highlights the importance and sensitivity of De Hoop, it also serves the purpose of fully setting out how much can go wrong environmentally under the impact of a missile test range if proper controls are not rigorously applied.

In summary, in the light of all these considerations, I should like to call for the following: Firstly, I should like to call for the categorical assurance from the hon the Minister to the effect that there simply is no alternative whatsoever to the area being used as a missile test range. I can appreciate that for security reasons it will be difficult for the hon the Minister to provide motivation in detail in public, and therefore I suggest that the hon the Minister briefs either the leaders of the various parties or the chairman of the various groups or other representatives he feels he can brief because if such a group were to accept the motivation, then I believe the public would have full confidence that there is in fact no alternative to this scheme. I would abide by the reaction of my group’s spokesman or my leader arising out of such a briefing.

Secondly, assuming that the project will proceed, I should like to call upon the hon the Minister and the department to provide maximum public access to the area within the parameters, obviously, of safety and security considerations, but let us have the maximum possible access.

Thirdly and finally and of the greatest importance, I should like to call for the establishment of a conservation watchdog committee to have the responsibility for ensuring that all the findings and recommendations of the Hey Commission are implemented. They must be scrupulously observed. It is absolutely vital that such an independent monitoring committee is established and that independent conservations such as those who served on the Hey Commission be appointed to participate. One possible suggestion, because one appreciates the security implications, would be to ask the Council for the Environment, which is a statutory body, to become involved in this monitoring exercise.

A final query in this regard would be to ask the hon the Minister what the status is of the landowners in the area. How are the negotiations with them progressing, and in particular, what is the future of the community of Skipskop? It will be interesting to know how these people are being treated and how they are reacting to the developments.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Constantia spoke about the Hey Report and I should like to comment on that.

Dr Douglas Hey and his committee launched this investigation under very difficult circumstances. Dr Hey and his committee performed an excellent task under extremely difficult circumstances and came up with a unanimous report which was systematic, objective and impartial. This was done despite the high degree of public emotion and the aggressive campaign the media conducted against the project at that time, of which we had a continuation in the Committee again today with the contribution of the hon member for Constantia. He does not want to accept the unanimous findings of the Hey Committee, and he came forward with questions concerning whether there is no other site and said that the hon the Minister should give the assurance that there is no other site. This was done despite the fact that the report of the Hey Committee states that the committee decided unanimously that that was the only viable site available for the purpose for which it has to be used. The hon member must tell us why he is doing this. At that time I asked him whether he would accept the recommendations of the Hey Committee, and he replied in the affirmative. He is not doing so now, however. What is he doing? Does he once again want to try to make political capital out of the situation?

The Government has accepted all the recommendations in the report and some of the most important of these are the following: The development of the proposed missile testing site is essential in the interests of the country and is required urgently. This statement was accepted unanimously by the committee, yet the hon member asked whether there was no other site that could be used for that purpose.

You were not listening.

Even if one listens to you, what you say is so confused that it does not matter whether or not one listens to you.

The proposed location is the only viable one which meets the essential requirements for the establishment of the proposed facility. This was a unanimous decision by the Hey Committee.

Did you get a briefing?

I have read the report of the Hey Committee, just as the hon member has, and those are my conclusions. Mine are right and yours are wrong.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: Surely hon members may not address one another in this manner?

Order! The hon member for Swellendam must take care to address hon members in the correct fashion.

The hon member for Constantia, then, Mr Chairman. The fauna and flora, as well as the marine life of the area, are not only unique to South Africa, but, in certain respects, unique to the world. It is a fact we must accept and it was also a unanimous finding of the Hey Committee. However, this does not mean that this vegetation is going to be destroyed. The existing—listen carefully now—set-up with regard to owners who allow free access to certain areas is definitely giving rise to the gradual decline of this sensitive area. In other words, the present system is destroying this area’s potential for nature conservation. Further development, particularly that of holiday resorts, could hasten this destruction. Therefore, if we are really interested in preserving this sensitive area, we must eliminate township development there and prevent people from owning private property and doing as they please. There is no better way of doing so than by giving the State a chance, by giving Armscor a chance, to try to protect the area. I said last time in this debate as well that a fence that is guarded provides better protection for what is inside than an unguarded fence.

Another finding of the Hey Committee is that if the unique character of that region is to be preserved for our descendants, the Government must intervene to stop the destruction and to restore the area to its original state. What better way of doing so than what is taking place at present with this missile testing site?

Another unanimous finding was that the establishment of the missile testing site could be instrumental—the hon member for Constantia must listen now—to the conservation of a larger section of the area than is the case at present. In other words, nature conservation is promoted by this installation, but the hon member is still objecting and asking questions which are aimed at creating doubt as to whether it was really necessary to destroy this natural gem of the RSA. Subject to certain restrictions, and taking the undertakings of Armscor into account, the construction of the missile testing range will promote the natural environment and the De Hoop Nature Reserve in particular. That was a unanimous finding by the Hey Committee. I do not think the hon member for Constantia has any hope of convincing the public again that the Hey Committee has taken the wrong decision.

The activities and functioning of this missile testing range will also mean a great deal to that community, and that was another finding of the Hey Committee. Armscor has also given certain undertakings which means that De Hoop will remain unharmed. Agricultural land of a high potential is, for the most part, being omitted from this scheme. The coastline to which the hon member referred, is being put at the disposal of the public from 5 km east of Waenhuiskraans The public are not being deprived of their rights to the extent that the hon member wants to pretent. The interest of the local line-fishermen are also being taken into account. A strip along the sea will not be closed when there are no tests in progress. The line-fishermen who depend on fishing on those banks for their livelihood, will therefore still have the right to do so, although it will be a more restricted right.

The area between Potberg and Infanta will be given to the Cape Provincial Administration as far as aspects of nature conservation are concerned, so that the present situation can be maintained. This is an extension of the present rights they have in regard to nature conservation.

As far as I am concerned, one of the most important points is that Armscor will assist in eliminating alien vegetation. In this regard I think particularly of the rooipitjie. Does the hon member think that this would ever have happened under the present set-up? Rooipitjie is taking over that area. In fact, when I took someone there and asked him what he thought was the prettiest fynbos, he pointed to a rooipitjie bush. [Interjections.]

Trouble will be taken—Armscor has undertaken to do this—to assist and support people who are losing their homes. It has been asked what is going to happen to the people of Skipskop, and the reply appears in the Hey Report. The people of Skipskop are going to be assisted to resettle with a great deal of care and enterprise. One of the pleas I addressed to Armscor was that since these people live in an area where values do not compete with values in the larger neighbouring towns, we must accept that. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, it gives me pleasure to follow the hon member for Swellendam. He must forgive me if I do not elaborate further on his speech. In any case I do not think he needs my help in this regard. His replies were quite adequate.

One of the most outstanding characteristics of the time in which we live, is the increasing amount of free time being created for working people. The SA Defence Force also helps people to learn how to pass this free time profitably. Because of the conflict and tension he experiences in his work, situation, man needs recreation. Well-chosen activities reduce tension and create a situation in which he can get rid of many of his bottled-up feelings.

Sport is probably one of the most powerful social phenomena of our time. It is a human activity which has great significance as far as national prestige, group cohesiveness, preparedness, productivity and educational moulding are concerned. Sport can no longer be considered an incidental free-time activity. It should rather be viewed as a particular activity which should be developed single-mindedly, to achieve a higher quality of life.

In the SA Defence Force sport and recreation are an essential subdivision of the military culture. Sport and recreation help to ensure the total efficiency of the SA Defence Force. The SA Defence Force sees sport and recreation as activities which play an extremely valuable role in the total process of preparedness. Participation in sport is considered an integral part of training in the SA Defence Force. Participation in positive recreational activities has a potential value which is virtually the same as in the case of sport. The SA Defence Force tries to train its members so that every member can satisfy his need for recreation as positively and constructively as possible. An attempt is made to make every member of the SA Defence Force realize that what is important is not the passing of free time but the way in which free time is passed.

The primary objective of sport in the Defence Force context is to develop physical fitness. As an organized game, sport has two clearly defined components, viz achievement sport and recreational sport. Achievement sport is a specialized form of sport which is supported by a strong scientific substructure. In the case of mass sport the emphasis shifts to active individual participation in sport in which achievement is of little consequence. The objective is a higher quality of life through meaningful participation in sport. The SA Defence Force plays a particular role in the development of both achievement sport and recreational sport. Achievement sport should not be over-emphasized, but on the other hand it should be borne in mind that the SA Defence Force owes it to the extremely talented sportsmen in the Defence Force to afford them every opportunity to realize maximum achievement. On the other hand the SA Defence Force must also see to it that the attitude towards sport of the young man who are conscripted every year, is formed in such a way that it will lead to active individual participation in recreational sport as a specific way of live. Achievement sport is organized and arranged by sports councils, committees and clubs, in terms of the principles and rules applying to amateur sport.

The sports council with its executive committee is the highest sports authority in the SA Defence Force and is also the policymaking body. Every type of sport played in the Defence Force at a level higher than club level is under the control of a patron. Types of sport played in the SA Defence Force at a level higher than club level are represented by head committees. These head committees function like provincial sports unions, and are directly responsible to the sports council for the organization, administration and promotion of the relevant sport within the stated national and Defence Force policy. Defence Force sports councils and Defence Force sports clubs and unit sports clubs administer sport at the lower levels. At present 45 different achievement sports are played in the Defence Force. Of these sports 15 also have provincial status. The SA Defence Force competes with full provincial status against national and visiting overseas teams. In sports which do not have provincial status, members are included in provincial sport to which their specific club is affiliated. The SA Defence Force realizes its responsibility to the top sportsmen who enlist for military service in the prime of their sporting careers. Particular attention is given to this group of sportsmen, and efforts are made to identify these talented sportmen, and of course sportswomen, as soon as possible and possibly to place them where they can be used to best advantage by the Defence Force and where they will still have the opportunity to develop their sports abilities further. Leave with full pay for a period or periods of up to 28 days is granted to military servicemen participating in sport at national or provincial level. National servicemen can also apply to the Exemption Boards for postponement of their military service to enable them to meet specific sports obligations.

Mass sport plays a very important role in the Defence Force. It is the foundation on which achievement sport is built, and in particular contributes towards promoting fitness. Participation in inter-unit sporting activities on Wednesday afternoons affords everyone the opportunity to participate in the sport of their choice.

Although sport is considered an official facet of military training, equipment needed for a specific sport cannot be provided from State funds. State funds are used mainly to provide and maintain sports facilities. Travel and accommodation costs of participants and officials are also paid from State funds. Obviously it has become extremely expensive to participate in certain sports, for example clay pigeon shooting. I want to ask that fresh attention be given to ways of financially assisting those members who participate in this very popular achievement sport to the same extent as other shortists in the Defence Force are assisted.

The SA Defence Force produces its quota of Springboks every year and many members are included in South African invitation teams and are crowned as champions. Since the beginning of 1983 the Defence Force has produced 61 Springboks, 29 members of South African teams and 36 South African champions. As a result of the value of sport and recreation, and also in view of what has been achieved, sport and recreation has acquired a particular status in the Defence Force, and in view of the enthusiasm and interest that prevails everywhere, I am convinced that this important facet of the military training of our young men and women will continue to flourish in future.

Mr Chairman, the CP has the utmost appreciation for the SA Defence Force. It has now become fashionable in the House to interpret a CP tackle on the hon the Minister, the political head of the Defence Force, as allegedly an attack by this party on the Defence Force. The hon the Minister is the political head of the Defence Force—he is a member of the NP—and he must therefore accept the fact that we are going to tackle him.

The Defence Force, under the leadership of General Viljoen, belongs to us all. We shall praise the Defence Force, support it, aid and assist it wherever we can. [Interjections.] Several hon members spoke of the young leadership corps that has been selected and is being employed in the Defence Force. I have personal experience of that, because my son had the privilege of completing the course at the artillery school at Potchefstroom, and today I want to pay tribute to the commanding officer and his officers who are doing valuable work with these young men of ours. [Interjections.]

He is a Nationalist.

The hon member has just said “he is a Nationalist”, and that is just another example of how he wants to politicize the Defence Force. I now want to ask him whether General Viljoen is also a Nationalist.

What concern is that of yours?

Is General Viljoen a Nationalist? [Interjections.] Is General Geldenhuys a member of the NP? [Interjections.] I think the hon member for Swellendam ought to be ashamed of himself!

Order!

I say your son is a Nationalist.

My son has a great deal more common sense than that hon member. [Interjections.] My son would not, like that hon member, walk the road of political integration. [Interjections.] Let me, however, leave that hon member at that.

Mr Speaker recently appealed to hon members not to launch personal attacks. Yesterday, however, the hon member for Kroonstad was guilty of launching flagrant personal attacks in this House. Yesterday he did not reply to a single statement the hon member for Jeppe made, but he did resort to personal attacks. He said, for example, that on his visit to the border the hon member for Jeppe proved an embarrassment to the Defence Force.

That is true.

Now he is saying it is true. What, however, are the facts? When the hon member for Jeppe visited the border, he was a member of the NP. [Interjections.] I personally, and you too, Mr Chairman, were NP Whips, and we received no complaints about the hon member for Jeppe’s conduct during his visit to the border. [Interjections.] If the hon the Minister received complaints about the hon member for Jeppe and his conduct on the border, but did not divulge this to the Whips, he has neglected his duty as a Minister. [Interjections.] If the hon member for Kroonstad received complaints about the hon member for Jeppe’s conduct on the border, but did not raise the matter with the Whips, he has also neglected his duty. [Interjections.]

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon member a question?

No, sit down! The hon member for Jeppe had written proof to indicate that he was allowed to visit the border, and he still has it. Yesterday the hon member for Kroonstad said the hon member for Jeppe spat at Ministers. I was also present on that occasion and I am now telling that hon member that it is a flagrant lie that he is blazoning abroad.

Order! The hon member may not say that it is a flagrant lie that another hon member is blazoning abroad. The hon member must withdraw it.

I withdraw it, Mr Chairman. Let me say it is an untruth.

Order! The hon member may proceed.

The hon member for Kroonstad quoted from a newspaper report about an alleged court case that took place 18 years ago. He did so to humiliate the hon member for Jeppe.

It is, after all, true.

Both the hon member for Kroonstad and the hon member for Win-burg ought to be ashamed of themselves. [Interjections.] Just as you, Mr Chairman, I and every hon member in the House have shortcomings, the hon member for Jeppe also has certain shortcomings. He aims a kick at a door every now and then when he is in a rage, but if I had to make a choice today in the political struggle, and also if I had to go and defend my country, I would choose the hon member for Jeppe every time. [Interjections.] I do not want to join any of those hon members of the NP on the road towards political integration. With the policy they advocate, what those hon members are selling the White man in this country down the river. [Interjections.]

I now want to refer to the allegation the hon for Kroonstad directed at the hon member for Jeppe. I challenge him, if he is man enough, to say it outside. [Interjections.]

Then Koos van der Merwe must also repeat all his accusations against the hon the Minister outside this House.

I shall do so. [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Roodeplaat accuses the CP of alleging that the Defence Force must defend communists in Mozambique. The CP specifically does not want the SA Defence Force to be employed to protect communist governments against resistance movements. The fact is that we specifically want to protect the Defence Force against political decisions by that liberal NP Government. [Interjections.] The hon the Minister said he was not going to reply to the questions the hon member for Jeppe put to him and would not be doing so for specific reasons, which the hon the Minister in fact gave. I now want to know from the hon the Minister whether he would be courteous enough to give replies to my questions if I were to put the same ones to him. Yesterday the hon member for Jeppe made four statements here. He said that the hon the Minister of Defence was partly to blame for the hon the Prime Minister having conveyed the wrong information to this House, this was so by virtue of a letter he wrote to Dr Eschel Rhoodie. In that letter he said, amongst other things, and I quote:

The hon the Minister therefore makes it clear in this letter of his that the hon the Prime Minister—at the time he was still Minister of Defence—had been guilty of uttering untruths in the House of Assembly. This hon Minister, however, was partly to blame for that, and therefore I want to ask him today, in all fairness, to give us answers to these questions. We are also requesting answers from him in regard to the Seychelles incident. As the responsible Minister he must tell us what happened there. A country was invaded, and the hon the Minister alleged that he was unaware of it. I should like the hon the Minister to give us an answer in this regard. We want to know why he was not aware of it. [Interjections.]

Order!

There are further questions I want to put to the hon the Minister, questions I want him to reply to. He spoke about the politicizing of the Defence Force. I should like him to give us answers in regard to the questions of the so-called referendum video that was shown to Defence Force members. I want to know from him why he did not give other political parties an opportunity to put their standpoints, with regard to the new constitution, to members of the Defence Force. I also want to know from the hon the Minister whether, in his political videos, he gave national servicemen to understand that the 1984 Defence Force budget would be the last budget of its kind passed by a White Parliament. Did the hon the Minister, by way of that video, give members of the Defence Force to understand that every cent that would be voted for Defence in future would have to approved by a multi-racial Cabinet or by a multi-racial tri-cameral Parliament? Did the hon the Minister thereby give members of the Defence Force to understand that on every piece of legislation affecting the defence of South Africa a multi-racial Cabinet, a multiracial tri-cameral Parliament and multi-racial Standing Committees would have to reach consensus? Did the hon the Minister tell them that he and Rev Hendrickse would have to reach consensus in the Cabinet in regard to every piece of legislation affecting the national service, even though the Rev Hendrickse has said that he would not allow national service for Coloureds until all South Africans, including Blacks, had been included in the Government of the Republic of South Africa?

Surely one cannot prescribe to them at this stage.

Today the hon the Minister alleges, in regard to the Council of Defence, that because the PFP adopts a certain standpoint, whilst the CP adopts a completely different standpoint, there can surely be no possibility of obtaining consensus in such a council. But the hon the Minister is someone who believes in consensus. He says we and the Progs cannot reach consensus. I think he is right. I want to know from him, however, whether he and the Rev Hendrickse can reach consensus.

Yes, and what about Rajbansi?

Yes, and what about him? I wonder whether the hon the Minister would not simply like to reply to that now. Does he think that he, Rev Hendrickse and Mr Rajbansi can reach consensus on the question of national service?

That is a very inane little speech of yours.

No, you are the one who is inane.

Mr Chairman, let me just tell that hon Deputy Minister …

Order! I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon member, but his time has expired.

Mr Chairman … [Interjections.]

Order! I cannot allow this discussion that is now going on here. Did the hon member for Rissik say that some hon member on the Government side was inane?

Mr Chairman, the hon the Deputy Minister of Welfare and of Community Development said we were inane.

Order! Did the hon the Deputy Minister say that?

Mr Chairman, I said the hon member for Kuruman’s speech was inane.

Order! The hon member for Rissik must please withdraw his allegation that the hon the Deputy Minister is inane.

Mr Chairman, I withdraw that allegation.

Order! The hon member for Johannesburg West may now proceed.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Kuruman certainly does not deserve any reply, neither he nor the rest of that party, and I am saying that because of the scandalous way in which they have conducted themselves in this Committee in the past day or two. They launch their personal attacks and then repeatedly make pious accusations against this side of the Committee about personal attacks being made against them. I again consulted the hon member for Jeppe’s speech, and he said exactly what the hon member for Kuruman said yesterday. Let me put this question to the hon member for Kuruman: Did he see that referendum video? I challenge the hon member to say what there is in that video, that is in any way of a party-political nature.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: I gave the assurance that I had said that the hon member’s speech was inane, but my word is still being questioned. I am being called a liar. I am asking you for your ruling, please.

Order! I heard nothing. Did the hon member say something?

No. [Interjections.]

Order! If hon members want to conduct discussions of this nature, they must please do so outside. They must not take up the hon member for Johannesburg West’s time with such discussions. The hon member for Johannesburg West may proceed.

I put it to the hon member for Kuruman: He must tell us what there is in that referendum video that is of a party-political propagandistic nature. We can look at the video together.

May I please ask a question?

No, I do not have the time for that. Let me say again that the hon member must tell us what there is in that referendum video that is of a party-political propagandistic nature. [Interjections.] The hon member made a statement here, and I am convinced that he cannot come forward with any kind of proof to substantiate it. That is the kind of blind allegation which we repeatedly get from that party and which virtually every hon member of that party is guilty of making.

Prof Hercules Booysen said he was wrong.

Those are blind allegations, Sir, which have no cogency whatsoever. With such statements they are certainly misleading people.

Prof Hercules Booysen said it was NP propaganda. [Interjections.]

As far as I know, Prof Booysen is a CP supporter and would not effectively …

Is the hon member disputing his academic integrity? [Interjections.]

Order! The only person to whom I have given the floor is the hon member for Johannesburg West, and I now ask hon members to give him an opportunity to continue with his speech.

Unfortunately I do not have the time to react any further to what the hon member for Kuruman said.

I should like to refer to a matter to which reference was made in a front-page report of this morning’s Beeid. The introductory paragraph of this article reads as follows;

The report went on to state that a group of South Africans had apparently left for London to take part in a memorial service on the steps of the building housing the offices of the ANC, because it was on Sunday a year ago that the Pretoria bomb explosion took place. I do not want to elaborate on this any further, except to say that it is apparently taking place on the initiative of private individuals, members of an organization called Victims Against Terror. This organization took the initiative in this case, and there are apparently quite a few people in Britain who had a hand in getting people from South Africa over there. Although one does not encourage demonstrations and so on, this is an interesting kind of reaction that appears to be taking hold here and abroad. It is a reaction against violence and revolutionary action of any kind whatsoever. The fact that this kind of popular support opposing revolutionary action and acts of terrorism is taking hold can only meet with the approval of this Committee. For that reason one would like to welcome this kind of action.

May I please put a simple question to the hon member?

I shall definitely not be answering any questions put by that hon member. [Interjections.]

I now want to make a few remarks about Armscor. In this debate mention has been made of Armscor, and I want to elaborate somewhat on that. Firstly I want to focus on the importance of Armscor as an institution. I think that in regard to what happened in the sphere of the arms industry, there are specifically two ways in which South Africa benefits. On the one hand it places South Africa in a stronger position politically by virtue of the fact that the arms boycott has compelled us to take the initiative ourselves. That has definitely deprived countries abroad of a means of blackmailing us. In that regard it has strengthened South Africa’s power base. In regard to our ability to be competitive in this sphere, it has politically enhanced our image abroad. On the other hand it has definitely meant economic benefits for us in the sense of having saved us foreign exchange. It also provides work for several thousand people in South Africa today. According to my information, at this stage, the arms industry provides work for approximately 100 000 people in South Africa. That is a phenomenal contribution that Armscor and the private sector are making to the country’s economy.

We can, moreover, highlight numerous other benefits in the economic sphere. The fact that as a result of the stimulation of entrepreneurship, management, technology and specifically high-level manpower training as well, a large contribution is being made to the economy, is of great importance to the country.

I notice the hon member for Jeppe is now leaving the Council Chamber. He will probably not be back for the next month.

Never mind, I shall be here.

He is off to Rosettenville.

The truth of the matter is that we are indeed experiencing specific problems with regard to the export of arms as such, because it is a very competitive field in which we find ourselves having to compete. One must accept the fact that as a result of the politically negative attitude of many foreign powers, one finds that many governments do not want to be associated with us in the arms industry field. The result is that trade cannot take place out in the open. A further result is that we are often placed in a disadvantageous competitive position in an extremely competitive commercial context.

There is an interesting aspect I want to point to. The truth of the matter is that the majority of countries that need arms are themselves embroiled in wars, with their economies therefore suffering as a result. According to statistics it is apparently a fact that only 25% of arms trading is done on a cash basis. A further 25% is done by way of bartering, whilst the remaining 50% is purchased on a credit basis. This means that great demands are made on the suppliers and producers to be competitive where credit facilities are concerned. He must be able to extend the same credit facilities as those that the major powers, for example, can extend. As a result of our own limited or relatively small arms industry, it stands to reason that our unit prices cannot compete with those of the arms industries of the major powers, and that puts us on an unequal footing.

I do not think that there are obvious solutions to this problem. In other sectors of the economy there are inevitably many incentives that can be made use of, for example, tax benefits, but owing to the fact that on the one hand Armscor, as a State corporation, acts as the central marketing co-ordinator for arms exports and, on the other hand, owing to the fact that the private sector, which is involved in the manufacturing of arms, already has certain tax benefits by virtue of the fact that they supply weapons to the Defence Force, the full range of tax benefits cannot be utilized to the extent that incentives normally can. This imposes major restrictions, and I think we must sympathize with the fact that companies in the private sector that are involved in the arms industry do indeed cut their profit margins to virtually zero in order to maintain their positions in a consistently competitive field. I think we must understand the dilemma in which they find themselves.

Mr Chairman, the effectiveness of any Defence Force is assessed on the basis of certain standards. These standards may include the degree of training of the members of the Defence force, the efficiency or sophistication of the weapons used. Over the centuries another standard has, however, been applied to measure the effectiveness of a defence force. This standard is the number of lives lost in battles to achieve a certain goal. If we apply this standard to the SA Defence Force, it has a proud record. The number of soldiers who lost their lives compared with the number of men lost by the enemy is trifling, a mere handful. This picture is, however, to a great extent marred by the fact that for every soldier who loses his life on the border and in training camps, three soldiers lose their lives on the roads on this country. Of necessity one asks oneself the question: How much do we spend on protecting the lives of our Defence Force members? When we think of our Defence Force members in the operational area and in the training camp, we have to admit that virtually the entire Defence Budget is used to safeguard the lives of these men. Expenditure outside the training camps and the operational area is, however, minimal. I am not suggesting that the hon the Minister and the chiefs of the Defence Force do not realize the importance and the seriousness of this slaughter on our roads. I feel that proof of the seriousness with which the hon the Minister and the chiefs of the Defence Force treat this problem, was the announcement of Project Anchor towards the middle of last year and the implementation of this project. Because this is the method used by the SA Defence Force to prevent the slaughter of our national servicemen on our roads, I think that we should take a closer look at how it works. The objective of Project Anchor is, inter alia, to identify factors which contribute to road accidents. In the second place it aims to make national servicemen aware of dangerous practices on the road so that they can avoid them. The approach of the SA Defence Force with regard to the application of Project Anchor, is that it should be voluntary. My argument is that we have reached the stage where we shall have to give serious attention to reconsidering this voluntary basis and that, where necessary, disciplinary steps should be taken against members of the Defence Force who do not obey road safety rules adequately. The way in which Project Anchor is implemented, is to motivate national servicemen to comply with these road safety measures. The question is: To what extent have we succeeded with this project? I should like to quote certain statistics. Between 1979 and 1983, 498 national servicemen were killed on our roads, compared with 144 on the border and in training camps, viz almost three times as many. In 1982, before Project Anchor was introduced, 90 Defence Force members were killed, and in 1983, after the project had been in operation for a while, 82 were killed. If we add the number killed and injured, we find that after the application of Project Anchor there was a drop of only 8%. The hon the Minister will agree that we all find this rather disappointing. Notwithstanding the instruction issued in June 1982 that weekend passes had to be extended so that it would not be necessary for national servicemen to speed on the roads, it was found that although there was a slight drop in road accidents on Fridays, the number of accidents on Thursdays increased. It is a pity that accidents on Mondays also increased compared with the number of accidents before Project Anchor was launched. People are inclined to say that these accidents are frequently caused by driving at night or drivers being over-tired when they set out, but even this is not proved by available statistics. Relatively few accidents occurred late at night or early in the morning.

I want to suggest that there be a shift in emphasis in Project Anchor and that national servicemen should not only be trained as good drivers and motivated to obey the rules of the road properly. Emphasis should not only be placed on motivating the national servicemen, but should be shifted to families, next-of-kin and girl friends of national servicemen. It is these people who are close to national servicemen and who are far more able to motivate these people to obey the rules of the road.

I therefore want to appeal to the hon the Minister and the SA Defence Force to see to it that at this stage, particularly when one considers the statistics available at present, more is spent on preventing this carnage on our roads. The SA Defence Force should also make a greater effort, particularly in the initial periods of training of national servicemen, to make closer contact with the family of these people so that they can be involved in this motivation campaign.

I think all hon members in this Committee want to convey a message to our national servicemen. The price—their lives—which they are willing to pay is a very high price, which cannot be measured in terms of rands and cents. The price they are, however, paying on the roads is twice as high because it is not only their lives which are at stake, but also the lives of other South Africans, who are just as eager as they are to serve this country.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Fauresmith will forgive me if I do not follow his speech as I only have a few minutes left in this debate.

I want to ask the hon the Minister to pay attention to what I have to say in these last few minutes because what I do have to say, may well be to his advantage. A good politician, like a good general, normally anticipates events in order to plan his action against a perceived threat. This particular Minister has not made use of every opportunity given him politically to lead the debate in a most positive way today. In saying this, I want to refer to the suggestion I made earlier when I called for the appointment of a Defence Council. The hon the Minister said that if I could give some content to this body he would consider it.

I want to remind the hon the Minister that Parliament has at least two major functions as far as defence is concerned. The first is that we have to pass the Budget, and the SADF cannot operate unless the Budget is passed by Parliament so that they can do what is necessary. Secondly, the SADF cannot operate effectively unless Parliament makes the manpower available to them which they require to carry out their task. Thirdly, the SADF cannot operate effectively unless legislation is passed enabling them to do so.

Now, I said that the Defence Council should consist of politicians. The hon the Minister has said that this is not necessary as he already has a host of organizations which can do all the planning and thinking that is required to run the SADF effectively. I must remind the hon the Minister, however, that the three aspects to which I referred, namely the passing of the Budget, the making available of the necessary manpower and the passing of legislation, can only be undertaken by members of Parliament if they are adequately informed. That is why I say again— and I believe that in this I have the support of the hon member for Durban Point—that this body has a very useful function to fulfil in the House. What is more, whether the hon the Minister realizes it or not, he is actually going to have no choice in this matter in the very near future. You see, Sir, the new Constitution provides for a Standing Committee on Defence Matters, and that committee will in fact be doing exactly what I believe the body I have suggested will do. That body will discuss defence matters in detail, will discuss the funding, will discuss the making available of manpower and will have to pass legislation. If the hon the Minister is shrewd enough and intuitive enough, he will realize that, if we are in any event going to have such a body in the new Parliament of South Africa next year, it is sensible to initiate the operation of such an organization now while at least we know each other and understand each other’s weaknesses and strengths. While we may differ with each other here, at least there is no doubt that we all trust each other. In the quiet atmosphere one would normally have in such a defence council, we would be able to debate matters and reach consensus as in fact happens nine times out of 10. This has been proven, for instance, when defence Bills have been referred to select committees which in that sense one can liken to a standing committee or in fact to a defence council in operation. I would again, therefore, in the few minutes at my disposal, appeal to the hon the Minister not simply to shrug it off and say that, because since 1912 it was not necessary, it is not necessary in 1984 either. In fact, in 1984 we are going to implement in South Africa a new constitution and we are going to move away from one which has worked relatively well also since about that time or shortly before 1912. So, I would say to the hon the Minister, think about this again—do not simply brush it aside—and let us have his considered views. I believe that in the long term such a body can only be to his and our advantage.

There is another matter I want to raise in the last minute or two at my disposal. I do not want the hon the Minister to get too excited about this either. It has come to my notice that among the young men involved in national service those who are not top sportsmen, those who perhaps wear glasses, who do not play for the first rugby team and who are perhaps not in the chess team either but who find themselves in-between, do not always enjoy the same privileges in terms of free time. They do not get off to play rugby over weekends, they do not get away to participate in chess, windsurfing, or whatever. I should like to appeal through the hon the Minister to the Chief of the SADF to ensure that we do not allow a rift to develop between those people. The hon the Minister knows what I am referring to. I can see he is sympathetic and that he understands the point. I am not fighting about it. I merely wanted to bring it to his attention.

Mr Chairman, I take the point made by the hon member for Wynberg. We will go into the matter. I agree with him that we cannot allow a rift to develop in the SADF at any stage anywhere at all.

*Before replying to questions by hon members and commenting on certain statements made, I should like to begin by referring to one aspect. It has to do with the concern expressed here by certain hon members about our involvement in certain neighbouring states. There has also been much positive comment in this regard considering the way in which the SA Defence Force is to be used in such circumstances. Some hon members are worried that according to newspaper reports, South African equipment and troops will be used in Mozambique. I should like to state this matter very clearly. I do so because I do not want the newspaper, wittingly or unwittingly, to distribute this information and faulty data.

When South Africa concludes an agreement with anyone, this country’s honour is at stake and we shall carry out our part of the agreement to the letter. Surely the SA Defence Force does not make war for any purpose other than to ensure peace and stability for this country. That is why peace treaties such as that of Nkomati are concluded. As regards the supply of equipment to Mozambique for the protection of the power-line which helps to feed South Africa’s network, I see no problems. Surely it is not being done in the interests of that region only, but, and in particular, in our own interests. However, one aspect is very important. It is that it cannot be expected of us to use defence equipment which we are unable to supplement as a result of the arms boycott against us for the benefit of another country. That would set too high demands on our capacity, in the light of the sanctions imposed against us. However, we have already agreed to the provision of the other necessary logistic equipment that Mozambique needs to guard its part of the power line. Any suggestion that we will become involved in the internal conflict of Mozambique or that we will support Mozambique in its own territory against its own rebels, is just as farfetched as the idea that we shall expect of Mozambique—I should like the hon member for Rissik to listen to this because he is the one who was concerned about this—to help us to trace and eliminate ANC terrorists or saboteurs within South Africa. After all, in the case of Cahora Bassa it is not wrong for those who guard the power line to be provided with rations, medical supplies, vehicles and other logistical support for the joint account of the two governments in question. People who try to make political capital out of this should consider their own standpoint more carefully and decide whether their own personal political interests weigh more heavily with them than the interests of the country.

I now turn to the hon member for Lady-brand. He demonstrated his province’s loyalty to the SA Defence Force when he spoke so proudly of the SA Defence Force and Armscor, and referred to the phenomenal progress they have made over the past decade. He emphasized the quality of the training in the Defence Force. It is that very training that has enabled the Defence Force to perform its task with limited means in these years. The hon member’s constructive contribution and compliments are sincerely appreciated, as is his warning that defence cuts cannot be made at this stage. He pointed out that we now have to pay the price of peace.

†Mr Chairman, the sound military background of the hon member for King William’s Town and his intimate knowledge of the problems of units in his area was reflected again today in his speech. His keen interest in military affairs is much appreciated. The matter raised by him is of course a problem which manifests itself in commando units throughout the country. Because of financial limitations, we are forced to resort to the introduction of the area defence system on a priority basis. Hon members will agree that this being the case, our northern border area should enjoy the highest priority, and I have referred to this previously. The top management of the SA Defence Force and I are highly appreciative of the valuable service rendered by the voluntary members of the Citizen Force and of the commando units. They are indeed the backbone of our part-time force and, as hon members so rightly pointed out, are making a great sacrifice in terms of time and money. Cognizance has been taken of the hon member’s plea for the gradual introduction of the new system of commando units outside the identified priority areas, and I have requested the Chief of the SA Defence Force to discuss this aspect with the hon member.

The hon member for Bezuidenhout informed me that he unfortunately cannot be here this afternoon. I have however listened to all contributions made by him in defence debates since he came to this House, and I am not aware of a single negative note in any of his contributions. His unquestionable support for the Defence Force is highly appreciated. I wish to assure the hon member that I have noted his request in regard to pensions and the general wellbeing of ex-servicemen and women, and I will do everything in my power to ensure that these matters receive constant attention. The fact that a section called Military Veterans’ Affairs has been added to my Ministry is proof of my intentions in this regard.

*The hon member for Umfolozi spelt out in striking fashion the value of the training of national servicemen and the development of the leadership potential of our young men. He also emphasized the valuable service of the leadership corps among our national servicemen, and this is deserving of the thanks and appreciation of all of us. I believe that the hon member for Kuruman also praised them. It is undoubtedly true that we have the best human material in the world. Statements by various leading military figures in the Western World that have already been quoted in this House attest to the impressive qualities of all our young soldiers of all population groups.

†Mr Chairman, I have taken note of the views of the hon member for Durban Point on the question of a formal forum for the discussion of defence matters on a parliamentary level. I have replied in detail on my views of this and do not want to add to what I have already said, but I will touch on it again when I reply to the hon member for Wynberg.

I am glad to hear about the excellent service the hon member is receiving in solving pay and other queries, and that he appreciates the problems we are experiencing in this regard. Referring to pay problems, I am of the opinion that this is the right time to give more information on the problems that we do have in this regard.

Taking into account the high visibility enjoyed by the SA Defence Force pay queries, maybe not during the discussion of this Vote but previously—and it may happen again in the future—I think this matter should be placed in further perspective. The SA Defence Force is, as we all know, a huge organization, with units spread across the country and with a great many men doing duty at remote and isolated locations. Our policy of manning is one of the aspects causing problems because the SADF has an extremely high personnel turnover. The bulk of this force is also highly mobile on account of the fact that at a variety of training establishments they are doing basic, specialized, qualifying and refresher courses. They attend these courses at various institutions before they are deployed. This all happens in a matter of months. One must, however, expect a fair number of pay queries, no matter how good the system may be. I may tell the hon member that we recently approached other large country-wide organizations both in the public and private sector in order to obtain their error rates so that we could have a basis for comparison. To our surprise we found that the SADF actually compared very well. During the month of April this year the Chief Paymaster received a total of 2 268 pay queries, of which …

They must all have come from me.

I hope so, yes. I must add that they have all been solved by now. Of those queries 346 were invalid—they all came from the hon member for Wynberg— while 138 were owing to members of the SADF either closing or moving their bank accounts without advising the Chief Paymaster timeously. In the case of 597 of those queries the time that had elapsed between the event that gave rise to those queries and the date on which payment was due was actually too short for the transaction to have been processed in time. These queries represent only a fraction of the total amount of more than R80 million, which is paid out monthly at 1 641 different points to a total number of almost 130 000 employees. The remaining 1 187 queries were the result of errors in the personnel administration and pay systems. Considering the number of people involved and the high volume of transactions, I do not foresee a drastic drop in this figure. The SADF has, however, been concentrating its efforts on reducing the time occupied by solving these queries, and currently most queries are solved within five days of receipt. Further efforts will be concentrated on the finding of methods by way of which those exceptional cases can be eliminated, which, for some inexplicable reason or set of circumstances, drag on for many months, causing a situation which would appear to support Murphy’s fourth law, namely that once something has gone wrong anything done to correct it will make it worse.

With regard to the question of ex gratia payments to members who do not qualify for benefits in terms of the compulsory insurance scheme, we are of course bound by the terms and conditions of the insurance policy negotiated at the time. Attention will, however, be given to the problems of national servicemen …

I am talking about the group insurance scheme.

I have already referred to the group insurance scheme.

Regarding the return journey problem of national servicemen—a matter raised by the hon member for Durban Point—I undertake to have the matter investigated in order to establish what can be done to iron out the problem.

Mr Chairman, in his reply now the hon the Minister refers to the compulsory insurance scheme. I am talking about the old group life scheme, which was a voluntary one organized by the various services’ own associations. Could the hon the Minister tell us whether an ex gratia payment could be made to those people?

Mr Chairman, I may indeed have used the word “compulsory”. Be that as it may, however, I was actually referring to the voluntary scheme. In this respect I can tell the hon member that we have to abide by the rules and regulations issued at the time. As a result of that, Mr Chairman, I am afraid that no ex gratia payments can be made to those members. That is the situation as it exists now. As the hon member will know, representatives of those members have already petitioned Parliament in this respect. I do feel very sorry indeed for them. Unfortunately we are bound by the rules as they stand, and therefore we cannot do anything about the matter at this stage.

Mr Chairman, I also want to put a question to the hon the Minister, if I may. I believe that we all accept that in terms of the rules those people are not entitled to any payment. Could the hon the Minister, however, not consider the concept of an ex gratia payment? Ex gratia payments are indeed made to other people, and if we look at the Auditor-General’s annual report we find that all sorts of ex gratia payments are being made to people; sometimes even by the Department of Defence, and to less deserving causes than the one in question here? That is, I suggest, what the hon member for Durban Point has in mind. That is what we both ask for, Sir.

If it is at all possible, we shall do it. According to my information, it is not possible. However, I shall go into the matter and report back to the hon members for Durban Point and Yeoville.

*Like the hon member for Durban Point, the hon member for Beaufort West referred to the service of staff in my office and in the office of the Chief of the Defence Force. Our staff thank him for that. The Defence Force is not there solely to defend the country with bullets and arms. It is also there to perform a good and efficient service. I appreciate the way in which the hon member thanked the staff.

The hon member for Schweizer-Reneke made a contribution concerning the role that people of colour have played in the SA Defence Force and in the defence of our country. Let those soldiers take cognizance of the fact that this Parliament—and I regard this as of great importance—takes cognizance with the utmost appreciation of their service against our common enemy. Units made up of people of colour have built up a proud history in this country and I am grateful that the hon member drew attention to their service. Here one has in mind in particular units such as the Cape Corps, which has a history going back to before the First World War. I especially appreciate the fact that the hon member referred to this.

†Mr Chairman, the speech of the hon member for Constantia today was like a fresh breeze in comparison with his stormy contributions in previous years. I have already dealt with certain aspects the hon member raised but in the short time still available to me I should like to deal with one or two further questions that he raised.

In the first instance, I can state categorically that there is no alternative area for the Overberg missile test range in this country. In the second instance, the Commission for the Environment which has overall responsibility for monitoring the environment will also have the responsibility of monitoring activities at the Overberg test range as far as the environment is concerned. This body will work very closely with the Department of Nature Conservation of the Cape Province because they are doing valuable work. Personnel of the Department of Nature Conservation will be on site permanently.

The acquisition of land is the responsibility of my colleague the hon the Minister of Community Development. I am unable to say how far this matter has progressed but I shall make inquiries.

*The appreciation of the work of the Hey Committee expressed by the hon member for Swellendam is appreciated. I am grateful to him for having also dealt gently with the negative aspects of the speech by the hon member for Constantia. The hon member for Swellendam has a direct interest in the region and his reassuring contribution ought to satisfy the hon member for Constantia as well. The hon member’s voters live and work in the area. He knows what he is talking about and therefore he also spoke with authority. I also note that the hon member for Constantia is quite satisfied with the development that is taking place in that area.

The hon member for Maraisburg discussed the recreation activities in the SA Defence Force. I agree with the hon member that no organization like the SA Defence Force can carry out its task with dedication without the necessary recreation. After all, the saying “a healthy mind in a healthy body” is a true one. The hon member can also take cognizance of the success achieved by the SA Defence Force in the field of rugby. [Interjections.]

I want to say to the hon member for Kuruman that I listened to what he said, but I believe that I furnished the necessary replies when I referred earlier today to the judicial commission of enquiry that was instituted. I also referred to the questions asked in this House and to what had been said in the course of certain debates. I did this while thanking the hon member for Kroonstad. The hon member for Kuruman had better go and look at that, and he will find his answer there. However, he will never be satisfied because he is fighting a by-election and with a view to that he wants answers that suit him.

What about the Erasmus Commission?

But you have already voted about the Erasmus Commission. [Interjections.]

Order! I have given the hon the Minister the floor and no one else. The hon the Minister may proceed.

Sir, since the hon member for Rissik has so much to say I could point out to him that there was indeed a judicial commission. He need only go and read the reports, and he will find all the answers there.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the hon Minister a question?

Order! The hon the Minister has already indicated that he does not wish to reply to questions now.

We are racing against time and there are other hon members who want to take part in the debate after me. If there is still time after that, the hon member may ask his question.

The hon member for Johannesburg West drew our attention to the spontaneous reactions that are occurring both here and overseas in connection with and against terrorism. I believe that this is a very important kind of reaction that is taking place, and the more it takes place throughout the world, the more terrorist actions will be restricted, particularly if one bears in mind that this is a phenomenon which is increasing in popularity.

I want to convey my sincere thanks to him for the perspective he provided with regard to Armscor. He referred to the excellent way in which Armscor is supporting the economy of our country. What he said is true, because the arms trade is one of the best industries whereby to promote economic progress in the country. It is also one of the most popular industries in existence. However, I must point out that some of the people involved in the arms trade are not always to be highly recommended. I thank the hon member for Johannesburg West most cordially for his contribution.

The hon member for Fauresmith referred to what was probably one of the most important projects being pursued by the SA Defence Force at the moment, viz Project Anchor. As the hon member correctly pointed out, the project is aimed at gearing the national servicemen mentally to appreciate and display the necessary awareness of road safety in view of the large number of road accidents that occur today. Hon members are aware of how the SA Defence Force seeks to avoid this and the hon member also referred to it. Weekends are being extended and an effort is being made to have national servicemen on the roads when the roads are not so busy. However, he also indicated that despite this, the loss of life among national servicemen as a result of road accidents is far higher than those which are due to operations. I am very grateful to him for his contribution.

Mr Chairman, there is one remark that the hon member for Kuruman made with which I wholeheartedly agree, and I believe that every right-thinking hon member in this House agrees with it. Indeed, I am sure that every party will agree with it. I refer to his statement that the SA Defence Force is everyone’s defence force. No one can find any fault with that. The SA Defence Force is everyone’s defence force, specifically because in the history of South Africa …

What does the hon member for Turffontein say about that?

He can make his own speech; I do not know what he has to say.

I say that the SA Defence Force is everyone’s defence force, specifically because no one has done more than the hon the Prime Minister, in his capacity as Minister of Defence at the time, and the present hon Minister of Defence, to depoliticize the Defence Force. Every officer, every non-commissioned officer and every national serviceman knows that there is a total prohibition on party-political activities or discussions in their messes, barracks, camps or offices. Specifically because this is the case, I find the accusations …

May I ask the hon member a question?

No, not at this stage. Specifically because this is so, and because every national servicemen knows it, I find it most remarkable that the hon chief spokesman of the CP on defence matters, and other spokesmen on that side, persist in this accusation that the Defence Force is being politicized.

You do at least know what their political affiliation is.

I shall deal with that in a moment. The CP is only undermining its own credibility. They can only impress totally uninformed and ignorant people in that way.

I make specific mention of this matter because the non member for Jeppe remarked in passing that I had supposedly said in some document that the Defence Force was the NP’s Defence Force. I was not present when the hon member said that, but I examined his unrevised Hansard and ascertained that he failed to refer to any specific publication. Therefore I have nothing to go on. I cannot recall that I said any such thing. If I did say anything that could be interpreted in that way, I now wish to state very clearly that it was a mistake and, in any event, was not my intention, because I am also on record as having said on various occasions that I appreciate the fact that many young men of all political parties, including senior members of the Defence Force that support other political parties, defend our country just as faithfully as do members of the NP. There are members of the PFP, the CP and the NRP who are wholly patriotic in this connection, and I am not one who measures a person’s patriotism in the context of the Defence Force, in terms of his political views. I wish to state clearly that I am on record as having said that.

There is another aspect of the matter which has a serious implication, and that is the CP’s allegation that the NP supposedly regards the Defence Force as its own. This is very serious, because it is a view that is totally alien to South Africans, is rejected by us in toto and is not only rejected by us but also actively combated. There are many examples in history, including modern history, of the disastrous consequences of such a view. I need only recall the situation in China before the Second World War and during that time when every political party had its own army. At the time they fought one another more than they fought the Japanese and, later on other enemies. In Zimbabwe, and in Matabeleland in particular, one has the situation today that because the various political parties also had their own armies in the past, chaos is still being caused there. Swapo is an organization which is active in South West Africa as a political party but which also has a military wing. This has absolutely disastrous consequences for any progress to a political solution. There are many other such examples. The National Socialist Party of Germany had military and para-military units before it came to power, which eventually became the SS, the Sturmstaffel, and the SA, the Sturmabteilung, which calls to my mind the Stormvalk of the AWB. This is something which must be fought tooth and nail in this country, and I hope that the CP will also ensure that private armies and political movements of this nature do not develop in this country.

Was the hon the Prime Minister a member of the Ossewabrandwag?

Various hon members of the NP were members of the Ossewabrandwag, but before it became a militant organization. However, it is an historical fact that Dr D F Malan rejected that movement. [Interjections.] I shall not permit that hon member to distract me from my theme.

What is important is what I have already said repeatedly. I want to repeat it because it is an incontrovertible fact, viz that Armscor came into being under the NP Government and that our own armaments industry came into being in accordance with NP policies. It did not only come into being, but was developed to such an extent that for all practical purposes, and for the type of war we are saddled with, and for our defence needs, we are self-sufficient. It is also a fact that this has happened during the period that the NP has been in power and that the Defence Force has been developed into the formidable force it is today in Southern Africa. This did not take place under a CP, a PFP or any other Government. Therefore it has nothing whatsoever to do with the politicization of the Defence Force as such. It is an historical fact, and no one can deny it.

†In this regard I want to refer to what the hon the Prime Minister said during the no-confidence debate this year, and I quote:

The signs are growing day by day that our neighbours are realizing this. It was particularly realized after Operation Askari on which I want to congratulate our armed forces who took part. It was also realized after the raids against the ANC in Mocambique, and the results are palpable. As a result of the strong, definite and determined operations of the Defence Force, various countries are now talking with us and the Nkomati Accord, the Lusaka Accord and the Cahora Bassa Accord were signed. These would not have come about if we did not have a determined Defence Force which we are prepared to use. [Time expired.]

Mr Chairman, I want to congratulate the hon member for Benoni on his constructive contribution.

I was initially given to understand that I would be speaking after the hon member for Jeppe, but he is unfortunately not here at the moment. His mere absence is a constructive contribution, and I want to congratulate him on that.

During this debate there have been repeated references to the constructive role in SA Defence Force has played in creating a climate in which political stability can take root in Southern Africa. The opportunity has also been created for the peoples of the subcontinent to give undisturbed attention to their actual problems. Seldom in the past has a country, which has had to defend and protect its territorial integrity and that of others, been able to do so with such relatively small loss of life and also seldom, if ever, has a country, with its limited capabilities, had to accept complete responsibility for safeguarding the whole subcontinent against the full onslaught of an insurgency war, the magnitude of which has never before been paralleled in the Western world. It is with a great sense of appreciation that one is able to pay tribute to everyone who has contributed to this success.

The SA Defence Force has rightly paved the way for the creation of political stability. The next objective, alongside that of political stability, is the creation of economic stability which, in turn—and particularly in the African context—is indispensable to political stability in the long term. So these two go hand in hand. Not only is economic and political stability in Africa threatened by Russian expansionist activities, but the economic realities of Africa also create a fertile breeding ground for Marxism. Once we realize and accept this fact, we will also accept that the SA Defence Force’s future role may not in any way be regarded as negligible. In the times in which we are living, the people of Africa have a golden opportunity to reach out their hands to one another and to concentrate on our own problems, those of famine, economic decline, underdevelopment and, in particular, an inability to defend ourselves against the onslaughts to which we are subjected. The people in Africa are going hungry, and it is specifically this fact that creates tremendous problems for us here on the southern tip of this subcontinent. Famine is the breeding ground for communism.

If one looks at the SA Defence Force’s sphere of influence, and one bears in mind the words of an American scholar some years ago, one comes to realize that Africa is facing one of the biggest challenges in its history, that of supplying its people with food. This learned gentleman made the statement that if South Africa’s expertise were to be combined with the agricultural potential and water sources of Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and our other immediate neighbours, it would be possible to produce enough food in this region to provide considerably more than 300 million people, probably even 400 million people, with food. So, in these times in which so much success is being achieved in the diplomatic field, specifically as a result of the SA Defence Force’s activities too, what is wrong with looking far into the future and concluding peace treaties?

Peace and stability in Africa depend primarily on its inhabitants having enough food to eat. People cannot eat bullets, missiles and armaments. South Africans cannot bring about peace for itself by shooting every hungry individual in Africa, but we can help these people to help themselves, and this is primarily being made possible for us by the SA Defence Force.

In this day and age man has the skill, the expertise and the means for converting this wonderful subcontinent, on which we have the privilege to be living, into a second little paradise. The average 24-hour downflow of the Zambesi River is more than all the water that is used, on average, over a seven-day period in the Vaal Triangle. This fact alone is enough to leave one gaping at the tremendous inherent potential that is being allowed to be washed away to the sea.

Russia, too, realizes all this, and we must therefore expect that its efforts to destroy peace and prosperity, and to thwart our efforts at bringing about peace and prosperity, will not diminish. The political stability which is in the process of developing in Southern Africa is the result of many years of hard work, in regard to which the SA Defence Force’s contribution must never be under-estimated. That is why everyone who is opposed to the peace efforts or initiatives is playing directly into Moscow’s hands, and that includes the hon member for Jeppe.

Bearing all this in mind, we cannot but pay tribute to the South African soldiers, and that we sincerely do here this evening. They are the ones who are safeguarding us.

Mr Chairman, on a point of order: It sounded to me as if the hon member said some powers were playing into the hands of Moscow and that he was including the hon member for Jeppe in that.

That is, after all, true.

Order! The hon member must withdraw those words.

I withdraw them, Sir.

The hon member may continue.

Sir, on a further point of order: The hon member for Schweizer-Reneke endorsed it.

Order! Did the hon member for Schweizer-Reneke say it was true?

Yes, Sir, and I withdraw it.

The hon member for False Bay may continue.

It is actually quite pleasant to round off the debate, which is now drawing to a close, with a little fireworks. Let me, however, leave it at that.

That is only an airgun popping off.

The hon member for Kuruman will still be finding out what the big guns is all about. It is the South African soldier who ensures our survival here on the southern tip of Africa. He is the one who does not hesitate to heed his country’s call. For that we thank him. It is also the South African soldier, however, who, stone for stone, helps to build up Southern Africa’s long-term peace and stability. We may possibly no longer be here when the fruits of those efforts are picked. I want to conclude by saying that it is for these reasons that we pay homage to the South African soldier and that succeeding generations, and the annals of history; will honour him.

Mr Chairman, the hon member for Constantia asked me whether I could confirm that the body which will be involved in the monitoring of the Overberg missile test range will be the statutory Council for the Environment. That is my recommendation to my hon colleague who is responsible for that. Perhaps the hon member for Constantia’s colleagues will relay that to him.

*The hon member for Benoni stated very clearly that the negotiations were conducted from a position of strength. I believe that people do not quite realize this. In fact, our security forces placed the Government in a position enabling it to negotiate from a position of strength, which it proceeded to do. I want to repeat—many hon members have discussed this—that the security forces are there to strive towards peace in this subcontinent. Therefore, if this kind of occasion arises, the Government makes use of it. I want to thank the hon member for his contribution. It is clear that he has a very sound understanding of the development of the new initiatives that are taking place in the subcontinent.

The hon member for False Bay made an outstanding contribution and spelt out very clearly the conditions prevailing in the subcontinent at present. He also pointed out that the rest of Africa was collapsing economically and that some of our neighbouring countries are becoming steadily poorer. This is a tragedy. We, as citizens of this country, cannot afford to have poor neighbours, and therefore we must use our opportunities to accept the responsibilities we have on this subcontinent and face them squarely. [Interjections.] We must not be like the hon member for Rissik. All he sees in the whole matter is risk. Life as a whole is risky. Therefore we must tackle this, and use our opportunities. If there is risk, we must say that we shall face it. [Interjections.] We must not say that we want everything offered to us on a plate, as the hon member for Rissik is always doing. The Accord of Nkomati hurt the Russians more than anything else, and the hon member for Rissik does not want to admit it. [Interjections.] I therefore thank the hon member for False Bay for his fine and illuminating contribution.

Sir, I wish to conclude with a message of assurance to you and hon members of the Committee. We are winning the struggle for survival. However, it must be very clearly understood that we have not yet won it. After we have won it, we must maintain that position. To be able to do so, we need a strong South African Defence Force, a Defence Force that holds the umbrella of protection over our fatherland while we are winning the fight in the constitutional field, too, in favour of the people of South Africa. This message I am only able to convey due to the exceptional human potential of this fine country of ours. The instinct for survival and the initiative of the people of South Africa are winning the struggle, because we have been able to satisfy the special needs that have arisen as a result of a comprehensive threat.

Mr Chairman, earlier in the debate I gave an indication of the special abilities and skills of those involved in our armaments organization and its branches. I also indicated how we intended utilizing these capacities and skills to meet our needs. These are accomplishments which we are only able to acquire due to the mercy of the Almighty, who has endowed this country with His special blessing. Let us therefore utilize those capacities in the future in all spheres of the national economy, not only in order to defend our country and all its people, but also to accommodate the reasonable aspirations of all our people in order to achieve long-term prosperity for our children and for their children.

As far as defence is concerned, it is with some sadness that we must also take cognizance of low points in the general public debate on this important matter. You must please excuse me, Mr Chairman, when I say to you and to the public of South Africa today that about three years ago I received from my predecessor a heritage which, due to his vision, had been developed in such a way as to accommodate the needs of our time. I concede that in that process he received the support of many responsible members on both sides of the House. However, for what we have been able to achieve, he deserves the thanks and the appreciation of all thinking South Africans, and not this abuse that is sometimes hurled at him by irresponsible, screaming people on emotion-laden platforms.

In conclude by saying to you, Sir, that I see my way clear to pursuing my task of looking after the country’s interests as far as defence is concerned. The support I receive in this regard from hon members from whom I differ sharply in the political sphere makes this task easier for me. I am sincerely grateful for the responsible way in which this debate was conducted and the high level that was maintained virtually throughout. I wish everyone a pleasant weekend.

Vote agreed to.

Chairman directed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Mr Speaker, I move:

Agreed to.