Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Simonstown asked me what my policy was in regard to a five-day working week. I take it that the hon. member wants specifically to know what my policy is in regard to the closing of post offices on Saturdays. I want to inform the hon. member that with the introduction of a five-day working week in the Public Service it was emphatically stated that as far as the Post Office is concerned there will firstly, be no curtailment of services, and secondly, no loss of productivity, and thirdly, it would not be accompanied by additional costs. On these conditions a five-day working week was introduced for certain sections of the Post Office. Like the Railways, the Post Office is a service-rendering Department and the hon. member will realize that communication and other services must continue without any interruption. Representations from one of the staff associations were received for compliance with a five-day working week, i.e. for the closing of post offices. This is a matter which will be taken further by means of negotiations, and I will shortly be discussing this matter with the staff association concerned, and careful attention will be given to the original conditions. Now I should like to ask the hon. member what his and his party’s policy is. [Interjections.] No, do not try to help the hon. member out of his difficulties now.

It is your Budget and you are replying.

But surely I am also entitled to ask a question in the same friendly spirit, and you are now in a position to advise me as Minister to do what your party would like to see being done. [Interjections.] Do you see, Sir, the Opposition finds itself in difficulties every time over what their standpoint is. They have no policy whatsoever, but they are the people who, according to them, are preparing themselves to govern this country within the foreseeable future. [Interjections.]

The Opposition’s amendment, as moved by the hon. member for Orange Grove, states, inter alia, that tariffs have been increased out of proportion to the needs of a Post Office which must be run on business lines. But the hon. member for Orange Grove was probably not thinking when he drew up this motion. The increased tariff will produce an additional revenue of R10.98 million for the 1970-’71 financial year. I want to give the hon. member the assurance that it is R10.98 million. I am budgeting for a surplus of R3.2 million. If I had not increased the tariffs to the extent to which I did in fact increase them, I would have had to budget for a deficit of R6.7 million. New I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove what I should have paid this deficit with? [Interjections.] The Post Office has no reserve fund as the Railways has on which I could have fallen back. In other words, the tariffs have not been increased out of proportion to the needs of the Post Office, and for that reason I maintain that the hon. member is being quite ridiculous in the wording of his amendment. I now want to ask the Opposition very specifically whether they are going to vote for such a ridiculous amendment? You see, Sir, they want the Post Office to be run on business lines, but they want me to budget for a deficit of between R6 and R7 million, and when I reach the end of the year what happens then? Then there is not enough money to cause the accounts to balance. The hon. members for Orange Grove and Jeppes both stated emphatically that the Post Office should be run on business lines. I want to ask the hon. members this. Is it good business for a business undertaking to operate at a loss …

But there is a certain principle.

You see, Mr. Speaker, some of the members do not want to reply at all, and the others are so nervous that they want to reply to me before I have even finished putting my question. It seems to me the hon. member for Jeppes is afraid that I will ask him a question he cannot answer in regard to this matter. I have a very easy question which I want to put to him. I want to ask him, as a businessman, whether he regards it as good business practice on the part of a business undertaking, to undertake certain services at a loss?

This is a State undertaking.

Why do they expect the Post Office to supply those services at a loss, while they urge upon me the necessity for the Post Office to be run on business lines. But they expect certain services to be run at a loss. The hon. member for Orange Grove said that I had said that commerce and industry would receive sufficient notice of tariff increases. I do take great care to give commerce and industry as much notice as possible of tariff increases, particularly in the case of general tariff increases, such as the revision of the tariff structure which I discussed in my speech at the opening of the congress of the Chambers of Commerce in Bloemfontein. However, it is not always possible to give notice of isolated tariff increases well in advance, as in the case of the few postal tariffs where changes had inevitably to be made. But why does the hon. member for Orange Grove not say that on that occasion I informed the Chambers of Commerce that a levy would be introduced in regard to the installation fees for telephone services, and that I told them that details of this matter would subsequently be published in the Gazette? Why did the hon. member forget to mention that? It would have been only fair of him to do that as well.

And the increase in the postal tariffs?

In regard to the recent tariff increases I want to say that I stated last year in this House that the tariff structure of he Post Office was handicapped by certain shortcomings, including, inter alia, many tariffs which are unnecessarily complicated; some tariffs are unrealistic and others have little bearing on actual operating conditions. Under the old dispensation tariffs were laid down on an entirely different basis than what is essential for an undertaking such as the Post Office run as a business undertaking. Tariffs were not laid down on an operational economic basis because at the time the Post Office had not been placed on a business basis. On the same occasion, and the hon. member for Orange Grove will recall this, I said that the entire tariff structure would be subjected to a thorough investigation, with a view firstly to the rationalization and simplification of the tariff structure and secondly to bringing it into a closer relationship with actual costs and services rendered.

When I announced the increased tariff with effect from 1st July, 1970, I said that it was possible even at this stage to increase certain tariffs and to introduce an installation charge on telecommunication services. One of the most important considerations, with the exception of the reason which I mentioned yesterday in my reply, is that many of these tariffs are completely uneconomic and do not nearly cover the expenditure of the Post Office. Handling and transport costs have increased considerably over the years, to say nothing of labour costs, while the tariffs of the Post Office have in proportion remained virtually unchanged. The old second-class postal tariffs, which I then increased, were according to this investigation quite disproportionately uneconomic.

The calculated costs for the Post Office for an ordinary newspaper was worked out at 4.983 cents per copy, while the old tariff was a half cent per four ounces per copy. I took four magazines which are sent by post under this tariff and I weighed them myself. I do not want to mention the names now, but I found that the first magazine with a weight of 8 ounces paid, according to the old tariff, I cent. The second, which weighed a little more, i.e. 10 ounces, paid 1.5 cents. A third which weighed 12 ounces paid 1.5 cents, and a fourth which weighed 16 ounces paid 2 cents. Now the hon. members must bear in mind that I have said that the calculated cost for the Post Office was 4.983 cents. In other words, on each one of these ordinary publications, the Post Office was suffering a tremendous loss. Adjusted to the new tariff the postage will now be as follows, and I am mentioning the same magazines I mentioned a moment ago, in the same sequence: A, 3½ cents; B, 5 cents; C, 5 cents; and D, 5 cents. It is clear that in the case of certain newspapers the new tariff is still not an economic one for the Post Office. But for most newspapers it will in fact be an economic tariff. The calculated costs for the Post Office on printed matter, commercial items and samples up to folio envelop size is 2.612 cents per item. If it is taken into consideration that the average weight of these postal items is .3 ounces, then the old tariff was I cent per item, i.e. 1.6 cents less than the calculated cost for the Post Office. The costs for the Post Office of printed matter, commercial items and samples larger than folio envelope size, is 4.072 cents per item. The average weight of these postal items is 5 ounces. The old tariff on these postal articles was therefore between 2 to 3 cents per article, and did not nearly cover the calculated cost for the Post Office. The ratio of the new tariffs to the actual costs is a more favourable one.

I think I can say that the public in general does not have much reason to complain about our Post Office tariffs, particularly not if the steadily increasing operational expenditure over the past few decades is taken into account, and also when these tariffs were last increased. The tariffs on commercial items and samples were last increased on 15th May, 1950—20 years ago, while the tariff on ordinary newspapers has remained the same since 1911—for 59 years therefore. The costs of replacing a telephone were increased in 1952 and those for telegraph services and data transmission in 1963. The costs of installing telephones can be fully justified if we take into account that South Africa is virtually the only country which does not yet levy installation costs, and if we also take into account the tremendous increase in the costs of this service.

The hon. member for Orange Grove also expressed criticism on the increase and the costs in connection with personal services. Now I can inform him that an intensive investigation by this committee of experts of the Department revealed that delays, particularly delays on trunk lines, can be attributed mainly to the personal call service. I have full details of the investigation here, but will not furnish them now because doing so would take up too much time. Another result of this personal service on trunk line services is that many more operators are required than are really necessary to handle the telephone traffic. The saving of manpower is therefore a very important consideration which must be borne in mind. The idea is to discourage this personal call service, for in many places there already is an automatic service, by the end of the year in most large cities in the country. Then it will be possible to dial persons directly. If this increase of the tariff is therefore not made to discourage this type of service, hon. members must not complain to me if the service is inefficient. This increase of tariff on personal services is in fact being done to discourage that kind of service so that our telephone service can, in general, function more efficiently.

The hon. member for Orange Grove said that the phenomenon which existed on the Railways was also discernible in the Post Office now, i.e. that the Government was being forced to fill posts which were previously occupied by Whites with non-Whites. I now want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove, and I hope he will not hesitate to reply, when he noticed this phenomenon for the first time. The hon. member became a member of this House at the same time I did, and I am now putting this friendly question to him. When did he first notice this phenomenon that white posts were being filled by non-Whites?

Under the present Government.

The hon. member and I both came here during the régime of this Government. This is of no avail to him therefore. But in point of fact the hon. member made no new discovery. This is no new phenomenon. In fact, this is something which was happening in the Post Office when my predecessor, Dr. A. Hertzog, became Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. Then it was already customary in the Post Office.

And what has that to do with the matter?

Because hon. members opposite are trying to create the impression that this is an entirely new and strange phenomenon, something which was caused by the so-called labour crisis. As I have already said, this was already customary when Dr. Hertzog became Minister and it was continued during his term of office. I now want to tell the hon. member for Orange Grove, who put questions in this regard, what the position is. I am certain that the hon. member will not analyse this matter because it will not be in his favour. The position is that in 1958 there were 7,855 Bantu in the service, as against 12,518 on 30th June, 1970—an increase of 4,636. Over the same period the number of Whites in the service of the Post Office increased by 7,487. The number of Bantu who in 1958 filled white posts represent 8.7 per cent of the total number of Bantu in the service. At the moment it is 8.5 per cent.

Has any change been effected in the classification of posts as white and non-white?

No, in other words, the percentage of Bantu who are at present filling white posts has in fact decreased. That is why the hon. member for Orange Grove did not want to reply to my question a moment ago. But he is now pretending that this is a brand new phenomenon, something which began to take place quite suddenly, overnight, in the Railways and in the Post Office. The hon. member went further and stated that the alternative policy of the United Party in regard to the employment of non-Whites, is that they should be trained so that they can help to overcome the manpower crisis. With the cooperation of the hon. member for Orange Grove—by the way, his co-operation has, up to now, not been very good—I should like to see how this is going to help me in the Post Office. I want to put a few questions to him. [Interjections.] No, Sir, the hon. member said yesterday that they had an alternative policy to solve this problem. He said that alternative policy was “train the people”. Very well, then. I want to say to the hon. member for Orange Grove that, in the Post Office, it is the policy to use non-Whites where they can serve their own non-white communities exclusively. Now I want to ask the hon. member: Must I train them …?

[Inaudible.]

The hon. member for Durban (Point) is not being fair now. I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove: Must I train non-Whites to serve Whites in our Post Offices? [Interjections.] Do you see the fluttering in the dovecote, Sir? They are so afraid that the hon. member for Orange Grove will now put his foot in it, and they have so little confidence in him that they do not even want to give him a chance to reply to my questions.

Are you talking now about the sorting of letters here in Rondebosch, for example?

No, that is not what I asked. Must I train non-Whites to serve Whites across the counters? That is an easy question. [Interjections.] Sir, we will ask in vain, for we will not receive a reply. The most acute shortage of labour, however, exists in the professional and technical sections of my Department. These are people whom I need to carry out the telecommunication expansion programme. I cannot employ non-Whites and change them overnight into engineers, technicians or telephone mechanics, as the Opposition thinks it can be done.

Ben Schoeman trains them in six weeks.

Sir, it is quite shocking to see how the Opposition reacts when they are in trouble. I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove: Must I train non-Whites in the posts of engineers, telephone mechanics and technicians? [Interjections.] No, it ought not to be necessary, but if it is in fact necessary, must I train them?

If the alternative is the total collapse of the Post Office service, of course.

No, that is not the question. If I do not have the people, and I want to continue the expansion programme, must I train them? It is not a question of the collapse of the expansion programme or of an existing service of the Post Office. It is an expansion programme which is in process of being carried out.

Is it your policy to …

I am speaking to the hon. member for Orange Grove now. Just give him and me a chance. We understand each other. Must I train these people? [Interjections.]

Order!

Sir, there is as little hope of getting a reply to these matters out of the Opposition as there is of touching the stars. I want to go further. I want to put an easier question to the hon. member for Orange Grove. I honestly think the hon. member will be able to answer this question. I have a shortage of more than 1,000 telephonists in the Post Office. Now I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove: “Must I train non-white telephonists to serve white telephone subscribers?”

If it will prevent a collapse, I have no objection to that.

No, It is not a question of a collapse. The hon. member would like to think in terms of a collapse of the Post Office. Believe me, he will have to wait a long time before the services of the Post Office collapse under this National Party Government. He need not be concerned about that. I am now asking a simple question.

Tell us what you will do …

Order!

Why did Senator Woolf in the Senate have the courage of his convictions to reply to this question of mine? Why does the hon. member for Orange Grove not have the courage of his convictions to reply to this question? Sir, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition may also find this question interesting. He said that he wanted to abolish work reservation. At the beginning of the year, on the eve of the election, Senator Woolf asked me in the Other Place to make more use of non-Whites in the lower echelons. My reply on that occasion was that I had just spoken to a deputation from the Federated Chambers of Commerce of South Africa, and that they had put the request to me to employ non-white telephone operators on night duty.

I then asked Senator Woolf whether he was in favour of this request from the Chambers of Commerce.

Are you in favour of it?

Sir, I have been in Parliament too long to allow myself to be distracted so easily. Do you know what happened, Sir? Senator Woolf could not get to his feet quickly enough to say that he had a completely different standpoint in respect of telephone operators and telephonists. He said that this was one of the cases where he would introduce work reservation. And then the hon. the Leader of the Opposition wants to abolish work reservation! For the post of telephone operator he would have every white blind person in this country trained. And then I asked him: “And if there are no Whites?” Again this answer came from him: If there are not enough Whites to fill the posts, the Minister must find other people to fill them.

Mr. Speaker, may I put a question? Can the hon. the Minister inform us whether it is true that in post offices in the Durban area there are Indians who are acting as telephonists?

To serve their own areas, yes. [Interjections.] They are not there to serve white telephone subscribers.

And if a white person phones an Indian?

Sir, the hon. member for Yeoville wants to distract my attention now. I deny once and for all and quite emphatically that there are Indian telephonists in the employ of the Post Office to serve white telephone subscribers. [Interjections.]

Order!

Sir, I cannot reply to any further questions. The hon. member for Yeoville is more or less the cleverest among them and he asked such a stupid question that I really do not have the time to reply to those questions. Do you see, Mr. Speaker, how the hon. the Leader of the Opposition at the beginning of this Session decided that this Session would for the United Party this year be “Operation Labour”? A psychosis of a tremendous labour crisis which is prevailing in South Africa must be created in this country. However, it remains a matter of beating the air. When they are asked to consider what the consequences of what they are advocating are, they flinch from doing so. What did the hon. the Leader of the Opposition do? I can read to you quotations of what he said here. I may not do so. He said that the shortage of manpower had assumed critical proportions in South Africa. He also said that the growth rate of the country was being artificially restricted by this Government. He also said that the decrease in our growth rate was one of the two most important problems in South Africa.

Hear, hear!

He also said: “One does not know whether any industrialist will ever get the labour he needs, at the place where he needs it in order to function competitively and efficiently …”

Hear, hear!

Let them shout “Hear, hear!” Sir. I am glad that they are still standing where they stood at the beginning of the Session. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition continued: “Only those who have appreciation for the role which non-white labour must inevitably play, seem to have any contact with reality. In this matter we must have a completely new approach. The relaxation of control by the Minister in regard to a few posts for Coloureds, is a welcome step in the right direction, but the real dialogue in the country is between the Whites and the Bantu.”

Is that my no-confidence speech which you are reading out again?

Yes, and you like it. That is why you say “Hear, hear!” each time.

[Inaudible.]

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition is quite good at remembering on what occasion he used those words. I quote—

Hear, hear!

I should like to hear whether they will say “Hear, hear” again now. I am continuing with what the hon. member said—

Why does the hon. member not say “Hear, hear” now?

I repeatedly said “Hear, hear.”

They praised and lauded the hon. the Minister highly for this standpoint which they thought was a different kind of standpoint taken by him and a different kind of policy which was being carried out by his Department and himself. Now, however, they are demanding the resignation of the hon. the Minister of Transport after the lesson he taught them here in this House. Now the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is questioning the credibility of the hon. the Minister of Transport. As far as these matters are concerned, the Opposition of South Africa should not try to make such a fuss about credibility. There they sit, the most sacrosanct of this country, filled to the brim with credibility. They are the knights of the order of credibility of South Africa, namely the High Priest Graaff, the Rev. Marais Steyn and Elder Etienne Malan! [Interjections.] The greatest bluff with which the Opposition has ever come forward, was during this Session with the so-called labour crisis tale. The Opposition protested to high heaven here about how the Government should train non-white labour, but when we ask them in what positions the non-Whites should be placed, they simply flinch from their own policy and do not want to say what their standpoint is.

This same Opposition which is so concerned about the staff shortage of the Post Office, which is so concerned about the effect the staff shortage will have on the implementation and completion of our telecommunication expansion programme, is the same Opposition which wants to introduce a television service for the sake of entertainment in this country without their knowing what the effect of that will be on the manpower shortage in South Africa and without knowing what the effect will be … [Interjections] Hon. members can kick up a row if they want to. I can understand the truth hurting a great deal. They want to do so without knowing what the effect will be on the implementation of the telecommunication expansion programme with which the telephone shortage is closely involved. What I now want to say the hon. member for Yeoville knows all about. But I want to say to the hon. member for Orange Grove that over the years television services have been discussed across the floor of this House but that we have never heard from the hon. Opposition whether they were in favour of the introduction of a television service being investigated further by a commission of inquiry. They did in fact say this after they had decided on the principle of the matter. At the beginning of the year I explained the reasons in this House, and I want to say that I think I explained them convincingly. At least I made an impression on the hon. member for Yeoville and the hon. member for Orange Grove. I do not want to discuss those reasons again. I only want to refer to one of them now. I said that the cost of such a television service on a countrywide basis and how it must be financed, as well as the influence thereof on our national economy, were matters which we cannot afford to take decisions on without expert advice. The United Party has something to say all day long about our manpower position, but when it comes to a television service, the United Party does not care two hoots what becomes of that manpower position, because they simply want a television service for the sake of entertainment. We then heard in the Third Reading of my Additional Appropriation Bill at the beginning of the year, for the first time after so many years, an announcement from the hon. member for Orange Grove in which he intimated that the United Party would also appoint a commission of inquiry.

Yes, ten years ago.

No, the announcement was not made ten years ago. It was made at the beginning of the year. I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove why he did not tell his colleagues in the Other Place of this proposed commission of inquiry. After all, they are also entitled to know what is happening in the United Party in this Parliament. Why did the hon. member not tell them about it?

I introduced a private motion in this House in which I asked for the appointment of such a commission.

Senator Badenhorst. who is a member of the United Party, said this in his speech in the Senate in February:

The discussion was concerned with the desirability of television.

No, I was speaking about the appointment of a commission. I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove why he never told his Leader about this commission of inquiry which he wanted to appoint.

But I introduced that motion in this House.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition said at the beginning of the year in the censure debate—

In his reply to the latest no-confidence motion he said—

What can be more clear than that? [Interjections.] I want to say that as far as the question of television is concerned, the “credibility gap” of the United Party is more at issue than anything else. Then they are the people who accuse hon. Ministers on this side of not having any credibility.

Even for you that is pathetic, Basie.

I know the hon. member will think so. He usually says things like this simply to placate his conscience.

The hon. member for Algoa asked me yesterday that a telephone service should not be cut off summarily if the account is not paid. He proposed that the subscriber should rather be warned by means of a tape-recording that his account has not been paid and that he must pay it. Unfortunately it is not practically possible to give effect to this proposal because technically it cannot be arranged to link a telephone to such a recording without depriving the subscriber of the use of the service. I want to inform the hon. member that there is a reminder service whereby a subscriber can have his name placed on a list and can receive special warnings from the Post Office when his account is in arrears and that he must settle it quickly in order to prevent his service from being cut off. For this service a reminder fee of 50 cents is placed on his account for every reminder which had in fact to be sent out. The Post Office is a business undertaking and unfortunately we cannot render this service free of charge.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) said that there should not be a shortage of telephone equipment since there are suppliers of equipment who allege that they can supply all the necessary equipment. I want to inform the hon. member that three important contracts have been concluded with overseas firms for the manufacture of telephone equipment in South Africa, using local materials and labour. Not only did this ensure the establishment and development of a local telecommunications industry, but also that the Republic in this sphere was far less exposed and vulnerable in the case of inadequate provision from overseas. The local factories took steps to adjust their production to the increased requirements of the Department, and where necessary they export essential components from their parent companies overseas. Apart from isolated delays in the delivery of such apparatus the contractors are meeting the Department’s needs, and it will in any case be of no avail to have large quantities of equipment delivered if it cannot be rapidly installed and taken into operation. That would be a waste. Precisely in order to install apparatus rapidly, the installation staff of the Department has already been supplemented by giving out contracts for this work to certain private contractors.

The hon. member also said that a certain telephone operator on night duty applied for a salary increase. It was however not granted and he resigned. The hon. member said that a counter clerk then did night duty on the exchange, and that this was a completely uneconomic arrangement. I want to point out to the hon. member that white officers and employees in the Post Office are remunerated according to fixed salary scales. It is not possible to deviate at will from these salary scales by granting salary increases in individual cases. This would, as the hon. member will surely be able to understand, be conducive to dissatisfaction among the staff. It is not the policy that clerks, whether on ordinary service or on overtime service should do work which is not commensurate with their grade, for example that of telephone operator, drivers or postmen. I said that in the case mentioned by the hon. member it was not possible to find a suitable replacement for the operator’s post concerned immediately, or to find a replacement telephonist immediately, which would of course have been the best arrangement. During that time a clerk may be used for that service, but only a very temporary basis for a few days or weeks.

May I asks the hon. member a question? Does it happen often, or is the case I mentioned an exception?

It will only be in exceptional cases that this happens.

Do they receive a night-duty allowance?

Yes. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) as well as the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) spoke about housing and asked for something to be done about this. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) suggested that rentals should he subsidized as in the Public Service. I just want to inform the hon. member that a house ownership scheme, with the subsidizing of payments on house loans exists on the same basis as is the case in the rest of the Public Service. Since the Post Office became independent the supply of official residences for staff has increased dramatically. In 1968-’69 68 and in 1969-70 88 official residential units were supplied and provision is made in planning for the supply of 136 during the present financial year. These dwellings are being made available to officials at small places in particular where private accommodation is not available.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) also referred to three women employed behind a counter for registered articles in Pietermaritzburg, and he asked why these women were not receiving the same remuneration as men. The principle of equal remuneration for equal work is being applied as far as is practicable in the Post Office. From matriculation qualifications onwards, similarly qualified men and women performing duties of an equal value, are allocated the same starting salary. The hon. member also asked whether the conversion of party-line telephone services into automatic services means that individual lines for the subscribers are being supplied, and also whether this would eliminate listening in. This does not mean that an individual line can be supplied for every subscriber. A maximum of five subscribers will make use of one line. Listening in is in fact eliminated when a party-line service is converted to an automatic service. Only the telephone of a person for whom a call is intended will ring, and other persons cannot listen in when he is using the telephone. This system which ensures complete secrecy, was developed by Post Office engineers in South Africa.

The hon. members for Pietermaritzburg (City) and Simonstown both asked that the arrangement for postmen to use mopeds should be expanded. I can just say, for the information of hon. members, that it will in fact be expanded to, inter alia, Boksburg, Germiston, Roodepoort. Springs, Pietermaritzburg, Bloemfontein, Kroonstad, East London, Port Elizabeth and Queenstown. Ninety-one additional mopeds will be purchased for this purpose. This will happen during the next three months. The idea is to continue to expand postal deliveries by means of postmen on mopeds.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) referred to Indians who were doing satisfactory work as postmen in Pietermaritzburg and asked when Indians would be appointed permanently. In Pietermaritzburg a number of Indians are temporarily occupying the posts of Whites, inter alia, of postmen, because Whites are at present not available for the post. In their own areas there are posts for Indians in the permanent establishment of the Department. Virtually all the Indians who are occupying these posts have been appointed permanently. The hon. member stated that he had made it his task to achieve this. I must however disillusion the hon. member; non-Whites have been appointed as postmen for years now, even long before he became a member of this House.

The hon. member for Umbilo referred to public telephone booths frequently being out of order. He also advocated that more public telephone booths be supplied in parts where the public are waiting for private connections. Damage to telephone booth telephones by vandals remains a headache. This is something which is and remains a problem for all telephone organizations. The Post Office is undertaking continual research with a view to designing public telephones which are more damage-proof. It also remains conversant with what is being done in other countries in this sphere. We are doing everything practically possible to cope with the problem. Inter alia, it is being arranged that telephone booths, where possible, are being constructed where they are under surveillance.

As regards the supply of public telephone booths in areas where private telephone services are not yet available, I can give the hon. member the assurance that special steps, as far as these are justified, are being taken to supply interim public telephone facilities which are available to all, for example by laying special service lines pending the laying of cables in a certain area.

The hon. member also asked for additional seats to be supplied in post offices for the aged going to fetch their pension money. This is a matter which has previously been raised in this House. We are still giving our attention to this matter. It is not always possible to make seats available in old post offices because there is sometimes not enough space. In the planning of new post offices making provision for suitable seats for those pensioners is in fact being taken into consideration.

The hon. members for Pietermaritzburg (City) and Pietermaritzburg (District) both referred to the expansion of the automatic exchange in Pietermaritzburg and asked when it would be put into operation so that the waiting applicants there can get their service. It is true that on 7th February last year I said in reply to a question by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) that the new automatic exchange in Pietermaritzburg was expected to be completed by December 1970. As a result of an unavoidable delay in the delivery of certain essential apparatus—possibly one of those matters which is an exception to the rule—there was unfortunately a delay, and it is now expected that the exchange will only be ready by the middle of 1971. The exchange is being installed under contract, and the Department is keeping in touch with the contractors to ensure that the installation work is expedited and that there will be no further delay. It is expected that, with the completion of the exchange, adequate cable leads for all waiting applicants will be available.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) asked what the arrangement in regard to the delivery of post in Bantu areas is. In pursuance of general Government policy non-Whites are as far as this is practically possible served by members of their own racial groups. This entails that the delivery of mail articles in purely non-white residential areas is being done by non-Whites. Such an area must, however, comply with certain requirements before a postal delivery service can be introduced— i.e. that the streets have been built and that the houses must be supplied with numbers. As the hon. member knows, the same conditions apply in white areas.

Mr. Speaker, that brings me to the end of my reply. There are probably a few points of local interest which I may perhaps have omitted. You will admit that I have been replying for a long time now. If hon. members feel that they would really have replies to those little matters, then they must please just write me a letter and I shall reply to them.

The hon. the Minister ended the Second-Reading debate by likening some of our members to dominees, but I would like to tell the hon. the Minister that to some of us he sounded for all the world like a school teacher and a prosy and pompons one at that. On the subject of television, which is the first point I want to raise this afternoon, I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that the South African public are heartily sick and tired of being treated like a lot of schoolchildren over this issue, as though we were all waiting to be given a treat when teacher thinks it is wise for us to have it. That is the attitude. The hon. the Minister talks about the manpower shortage and says that we are thoroughly irresponsible because we have not even gone into this question. Well, I am quite sure the hon. the Minister knows better than anybody that the day we introduce television in this country, we will have technicians coming here from overseas by the score to service the whole system for us if we could not produce enough ourselves. And we have plenty of them here now. When it comes to people who can actually produce programmes, we have a lot of local talent, local talent consisting of people who themselves have been overseas to study this medium. But what we object to most about this whole business is that the Government’s attitude has been typically autocratic from the beginning—an attitude of “we know what is good for you”. As far as we are concerned, this is an insufferable attitude. As long ago as 1958 organized commerce in South Africa called for the introduction of television. If the Government had been enterprising enough we could by now have perfected its use in education, which would have been an enormous boon to South Africa as a whole. The Government’s dithering attitude over this business, and it has dithered from year to year, has given rise to another unfortunate result, and that is what I consider to be a most unwise form of speculation, share speculation, as a result of the Government playing hot and cold over this matter. This is understandable. The public is involved and one can understand that they feel that they are entitled to speculate. But it has given rise to all sorts of undesirable practices, as the hon. the Minister would know. When is this type of nonsense going to end? There may be people who can make out a case, or think they can, in favour of not having television. We know quite well, it is an accepted fact, that once television is introduced it permeates every facet of society. But the fact of the matter is that, whether the Minister likes it or not, and whether hon. members on that side like it or not, the people in South Africa want television because it is as much a part of modern life as are telephones and motorcars. It is as useless for the hon. the Minister to continue putting obstacles in the way of its introduction as it was for Mr. Yssel in the Transvaal to try to do away with mini-skirts, because if girls like to wear minis they are going to. Tentative policies—and I say “tentative policies” advisedly—have already been announced from time to time by the hon. the Minister. It is this dithering we object to and I do not mean to reflect on the commission. The introduction of this medium is surrounded by policy reservations of all kinds—for instance, the type of programme we should have. To me as a representative of the general public it is quite clear that a final decision about these things, as about so much in our public life, is going to be taken with a minimum of consultation with the people most closely concerned—the general public itself. Why has this Government, instead of trying to avoid it, not encouraged a public dialogue, an open discussion, on this subject? Why not a public ventilation of ideas and opinions about what a television service in South Africa should provide? That is, of course, quite apart from the technical aspect which must be left to the experts. This is another indication of the Minister and the Government having virtually no trust in the opinions, balance and integrity of the ordinary South African citizen. We are not a lot of dolts; we are not necessarily amoral and many of us are not even immoral. Why has the business community not been consulted on a wide scale? There are so many elements of our population whose views could have been obtained, apart from the commission. Our educationists are interested; so are our housewives, our sports leaders, our writers and social workers as well as every ordinary citizen in the country. A commission is not enough. In any event, we know what this Government does with reports of commissions containing ideas of which the Government disapproves. It has, in fact, became a kind of recognized Government practice to refer to a closed commission practically every subject it wants to avoid. This is why the hon. the Minister referred the subject of television to a commission before the last election. As far as we are concerned, had we been in office, we would have encouraged a frank and open public discussion on this subject on every level. What right has any politician, the Minister included, to declaim that he alone knows what is good for us in this field? What right has the Chairman of S.A.B.C., who is also Chairman of the Broederbond, to think that he has the moral welfare of our people in his verkrampte hands? The people of this country, whose money goes to pay for services of this kind, should make it absolutely clear to this Government that they intend getting television at the time and on conditions they alone deem appropriate. It is time the people in South Africa made that clear. They are tired of being treated like a bunch of school kids. In fact, this cloak and dagger attitude towards television is too ridiculous for words; we are just fed up with it.

My second point refers to something quite different. I want to deal with the S.A.B.C.’s recent refusal to permit three African children who, unconscious of the fact that Beethoven is Beethoven only when played by Whites in South Africa, recently entered for a S.A.B.C. piano-playing competition for young people. However, they were not permitted to have their playing relayed over the normal transmissions because they could, as one of the S.A.B.C. officials said at the time, only function within their own cultural context. Have you ever heard such rubbish in your life! I have come to the conclusion that some people in South Africa, certainly some hon. members on the other side, are out of their senses when that type of thing can occur. If these African children are talented enough to play Beethoven for concert purposes over the air, what on earth has their colour got to do with it? Are the Minister and some of his dour and mean-minded cultural advisers not thankful that these children devoted their time to studying Beethoven instead of the Beatles Is he not glad about that?

It would have been all right had they played on the black notes only.

What interests me is the extraordinary spurious reason given for their playing not being broadcast. We ought to take a deep interest in the cultures of other people. Would our so-called way of life have been affected by hearing these three children playing Beethoven over the air? We, Sir, listen to kwela music and all sorts of other African music day in and day out. So, what is wrong with Beethoven for them? Would we be lending ourselves to a type of cultural subversion to listen to them over the air? The whole thing, really, is quite crazy and I should like the Minister to give us his opinion on that ridiculous position.

My third point concerns the Post Office. I had a letter the week before last from a lady from the constituency of the Leader of the Opposition.

Why should she write to you?

She wrote to me because it concerned a question of her legal rights as a married woman. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Wynberg, who has just sat down, gave us a lengthy dissertation on television. It was a dissertation larded with generalities. But what is surprising, is that although the Leader of the Opposition stated quite clearly on an earlier occasion that the people of South Africa did not want commissions but television, the hon. member for Wynberg not only asked for a commission this afternoon, but, in fact, said that the people should become a commission themselves. This is rather in conflict with what was said by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. I think the hon. the Minister replied adequately during the Second-Reading debate on the arguments advanced as regards the question of television. For that reason I think we would do well to leave this matter at that.

Before bringing a few of the minor problems in my constituency to the attention of the hon. the Minister, I should like to express the sincere appreciation of my constituency to the hon. the Minister and his Department for the excellent services—and I know what I am talking about—rendered by the Post Office in that constituency. In this connection I want to refer in particular to the delivery of mail. I think I have every right to say that we are very fortunate to have our mail delivered to our front doors every day without fail. We commend the Post Office for that service.

We do have one problem, however. This is a problem with which the hon. the Minister is likely to agree. The problem we are struggling with concerns telephone services. We are grateful for the fact that a new additional telephone exchange is being erected in our area at present. When this telephone exchange is completed the position as regards our telephone services will be alleviated considerably. However, I trust that the hon. the Minister will take note of our problem, and that is that, as far as I know, the new telephone exchange will only provide for 3,500 additional lines. This number may possibly be increased to 5,000 depending on the circumstances. Our problem is now that we have three townships which have already been developed and in which there are only about 20 connected services available at present. In addition, there are seven townships which are in process of being proclaimed, while another 200 acres of industrial land are going to be developed in the near future. In addition, there are the proposed extensions to existing industries. It seems, therefore, as if the proposed or planned new telephone exchange is not going to be able to provide adequate services when taking into account the requirements which are going to arise now and in the near future. I want to ask the hon. the Minister and his staff to give their attention to this matter.

Another matter which is quite alarming has come to our notice as regards the project I referred to a moment ago, and that is that it is alleged that the building which is going to accommodate the new telephone exchange, will not be delivered by the contractor until three months after the original date of completion. In order to set the minds of my voters at rest, it will be a good thing if the hon. the Minister will indicate whether the building and the whole of the project will be completed and delivered on the date originally planned.

I also want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not consider making available call boxes that can be locked, particularly in those areas where there is such an enormous shortage of services. The keys of these call boxes can then be distributed among the residents of that area according to a formula laid down by his Department, so that these residents will at least have a telephone service in times of an emergency. I want to say that I am quite satisfied that our residents do not use the telephone services for unnecessary purposes. However, it sometimes happens that these residents do need a telephone service, particularly when the husbands are working shifts or are doing night duty or in case of illness when the wives and/or children have to contact a doctor or somebody they want to get hold of under most difficult circumstances. I want to ask whether it is possible to consider whether these call boxes cannot be locked. This will also help to reduce considerably the maintenance costs of these call boxes. We know the extent of the vandalism there is as far as these call boxes are concerned. By locking these call boxes the maintenance costs Will be reduced to a considerable extent.

Before leaving this matter, I want to express my sincere appreciation to the administrative staff of the office of the Telephone Manager in Johannesburg in particular who, up to now, have already assisted us under very difficult circumstances whenever we approached them with our problems.

In conclusion, I should like to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister to the fact that it was indicated that Springs is going to get a new General Post Office, one which is befitting the status of Springs and not only the East Rand, but also the whole of the Eastern Transvaal. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he is in a position at this early stage to indicate when the erection of this new post office will be commenced with.

Mr. Chairman, I am not unmindful of a sense of occasion and privilege as I now rise to speak. I appreciate fully the responsibility and the honour that now rest upon me. Since the commencement of this Session I have tried to absorb the atmosphere and the workings of this august House and I have been forcibly struck by the dedication with which hon. members of this House have approached their respective tasks. Differences of opinion, thought and approach there must toe but this I regard as healthy and it augurs well for our democratic way of life.

Various speakers have rightly and dutifully highlighted the various facets of this vast organization of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs of the Republic of South Africa tout none so far has spoken about how all this affects the non-white users of the service. Permit me therefore to draw the attention of hon. members to the paucity of amenities and facilities in the non-white areas, particularly in those hugh Bantu, Indian and Coloured townships which about on to the metropolitan areas throughout the country and which are growing at a very fast rate. It is common knowledge that the Bantu has not yet fully absorbed the uses of the telephone, tout the day is coming, and it is not far off, when he will. We must just cast back our minds to the days when he used to fear the white doctor and hospitals and regarded them with a sense of trepidation. Now that he has got over that fear, we find that our hospitals can scarcely cope with their needs. The same thing Will happen in the case of the telephone.

Sir, all I am asking is that the Minister should do his utmost to ensure that these vast centres are properly and adequately supplied with telephone facilities. Those of us who have an intimate knowledge of the Bantu townships in particular realize what this lack of telephone communication means to them. Whilst I fully appreciate that we cannot have telephones in every household I should like to ask the Minister if it is not possible to see that more call boxes are installed in those townships. There are call boxes, of course, but they are comparatively few and far between. Those that are not periodically pilfered are sometimes out of order. Therefore I ask the Minister in all sincerity to see that more and more call boxes are installed in the Bantu townships.

It will give the inhabitants of those townships a sense of security. It will give them a sense of well-being and it will give them a sense of being part of the society of South Africa. What is more important, it will help us in our race relations. We know how the inhabitants of those townships have to struggle. I do not have sufficient time to digress now and to talk widely on that subject, but I should like to urge the Minister strongly to see that more and more call boxes are installed there.

In so far as the Indian and Coloured peoples are concerned, we realize that they are more sophisticated than their Bantu counterparts, but they are also becoming businessmen. They are also enjoying the fruits of civilization and here again, whilst I appreciate the difficulties which beset the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, I should like to make another plea for more call boxes to be installed in these townships as well. It is not much to ask, Mr. Chairman, and I think that this is a service which we can well spare. I am sure that, hard pressed as the white population is, we shall not begrudge the non-white population these facilities.

In conclusion I should like to congratulate the Postmaster-General and his whole staff on having done a job of work in a very efficient manner under very difficult circumstances. They have been criticized, sometimes rightly, but in many cases it has been beyond their power to offer the services that are lacking. Now that they are divorced from the Public Service Commission and are an autonomous body, I am sure that we can all look to them to give us that bold and fearless guidance and service which this country so richly deserves.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Umlazi heartily on his maiden speech. We know exactly the position he is in. We also want to wish him every success for the next five years. I think the House may rest assured that this hon. member will also make his contribution to level-headed debating. New members usually make use of their maiden speeches to state their voters’ cases here. However, we do not blame the hon. member for also stating the cases of the Bantu, Indians and the Coloureds. I should like to give him the assurance that the National Government in this multi-national country also has the interests of those under-developed groups constantly at heart. It is also helping those groups to share, in every respect, in our prosperity and in the services supplied. I can give him the assurance that the Departments of Bantu, Coloured and Indian Affairs are also doing everything in their power to create all the facilities for those groups in their areas.

I should like to refer to a small matter in which the Post Office plays a particular part. It is a matter concerning the savings accounts which are kept in their thousands by the Post Office. Unfortunately one sees time and again, in the Postmaster-General’s report, that up to 100,000 and more of these post office savings account books are lost. Sometimes five, six or seven years go by in which no withdrawals from or payments into these books are made. Then the Post Office is compelled to close the savings accounts. Thrift cannot be brought home strongly enough to our public, and particularly to young people. I once more want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to encourage this sense of thrift increasingly in our young people. If one teaches a child to save early on, he will continue with the habit when he grows up. Small problems do crop up with these books. The books are lost, and there is not always a post office in the vicinity where the disappearance of such a book could be reported. We must also bear in mind that this savings account system must compete with banks and other bodies that also have this system. Unfortunately it is frequently a very lengthy process if a person wants to draw money from his post office savings account. One must fetch a form, fill it in and send it off, and then after a certain time one receives clearance to withdraw a certain amount. Where banks and other bodies are concerned, one has the current account system and one can withdraw money from one’s account on a day-to-day basis. Certain bodies, however, also limit the amounts that may be withdrawn in these instances.

I should like to suggest that this savings account system be more widely propagated. It could perhaps also be presented in an improved form. We are very grateful for the arrangement that the Post Office has with schools, so that the post office savings accounts system can also make its mark there. Cups are also donated by the Thrift Organization to schools that have saved the most over a certain period, in accordance with the numbers of children in the schools.

I should like to associate myself with what the hon. member for Springs said in connection with the establishment of townships, although that does not have a direct bearing on this Department. In my constituency I have the problem that it easily happens that five or six new townships are established. The Townships Board then approves this under certain conditions, i.e. certain facilities must be provided, for example a road, electricity, water and sanitation facilities. I feel that we have come to the stage where the establishment of townships should not be allowed before provision has been made for the very essential telecommunications system. We cannot expect the Department to know of every individual’s plans for the future before they are carried out. One has the instance where certain individual companies plan a township, complying with all the conditions, and then sell plots. The public, being what it is, wants to know if there is water, power and streets, and only after their houses have been built do they rush along to apply for telephones. Then they cannot understand why they do not receive telephones immediately. This creates a big problem, and we must regard our country’s infrastructure as a whole. Telecommunications services are just as essential as water and power, and we cannot do without them.

Like the hon. the Opposition, I also want to fire a shell of buckshot. For the past four years I have each year asked for a report from the Postmaster-General about the telephone shortage in my constituency. Each year I accepted his explanation. I just want to say thank you for the fact that, with about 5,000 new voters in my constituency, it has pleased the Post Office to plan three new automatic exchanges, two of which have almost been completed. We must co-operate. We can only supply sufficient services when the Post Office is in the know and when there is overall planning by private bodies, local authorities and the Post Office.

Lastly I want to mention that, fortunately or unfortunately, I have a constituency that came into being as a result of a population explosion; a large portion came into being as a result of sudden industrial development. As a result of that a township of 900 houses sprang up within 18 months. This township accommodates 2,500 persons, and we cannot expect the Post Office to supply all the necessary facilities, such as a telephone service, there immediately. I would like to ask the Minister whether it is not possible to assist Bonaero Park, which is connected with the Atlas factory, with a temporary mobile unit to serve those persons at certain times during the week. As frequently happens in a fast-growing area, the local authority cannot supply the necessary infrastructure of buses and other transport facilities, and the people living there have many problems in the despatch and delivery of postal items.

Mr. Chairman, I think I am not alone when I say that I take it as a fait accompli that this country is going to get television. I have just accepted that, commission notwithstanding. I am sure that there are many thousands of other people in South Africa who also feel as I do. After all, it is absurd that this country with all its development, its financial resources and its modern outlook should be denied the most up to date means of communication in the modern world. There have never really been technical difficulties or financial difficulties. But there have been some political difficulties. I think one is entitled to assume that those political difficulties are on their way out. We will have television. It will probably be colour television and I have no doubt that it will be very good television. It is true we may not be able to enjoy the international matches that all of us were looking forward to. but we will have a lot of other advantages. There will be the educational value of television. The old, sick and lonely people will enjoy the benefits of this fine and modern means of communication.

I want to give the hon the Minister a little advice. I think he ought to start advising some of his colleagues to start going in for some training courses on how to present themselves over this very revealing box; because when some of these leading politicians, on both sides of the House, are in the sitting rooms of the voters and they are there, warts and all, so to speak, they may find that it is not quite as easy to be re-elected as it has been in previous years. So I think some courses in presentation of political personalities should be started by the hon. the Minister and colleagues on this side of the House as soon as possible. Television is indeed a very revealing instrument.

What about you?

Well, I have had a lot of experience. That is just the difference. I have had experience and I have been able to iron out some of the more obvious handicaps from which I suffer. I advise hon. members to get on with the job as soon as possible.

I want to say that I do not share the views expressed by the hon. member for Wynberg earlier, when she said that as soon as television comes, thousands of technologists will come swarming into South Africa to help us out of the labour problem we are going to experience. On the contrary, f think that every country in the world has labour problems, especially as regards trained personnel. South Africa should start right away and train personnel for television. We are going to need technical people and I do not think that immigration is going to supply our needs. I think we are going to have to look for it from local sources. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister if he is perhaps not in some way anticipating some of these needs by thinking of setting up some schools for the training of personnel, because the minute television comes to this country, we are going to be desperately short of trained technicians.

The hon. the Minister was right when last year or the year before he said, when talking of telephone services, that it was not just a matter of capital equipment that had to be supplied. The whole service broadened as more capital equipment was installed. The labour problem immediately was intensified. The same is of course going to happen with television.

Right through this debate, like through every other debate we have had so far, the old villain of the piece has been stalking: Shortage of labour and manpower. Of course, we have had the usual political badinage exchanged across the floor of the House: “What would you do in the circumstances; would you use non-white labour across a counter and on white telephone exchange?”, whatever that may mean. I do not know how one distinguishes a white voice from a Coloured, an Indian or an African voice. If the person is educated, it is very difficult to tell, unless one has him in front of one. But anyway, let us take it that there are areas where Indian or African people live largely, whatever the case may be. One might say that those exchanges are staffed by Indians, Coloureds or Africans respectively. I want to say quite categorically that this sort of colour bar is going to have to disappear. South Africa is going to have to choose in the field of telecommunications. as well as in every other field, between stagnation and progress. The deciding factor is going to be whether the colour bar remains or not.

What do you think of the United Party? Will they abolish the colour bar?

I am not interested in the United Party. I lost interest in them long ago. I am interested in the policy that should be chosen for this country if it is indeed to choose progress and expansion. If it is going to choose progress and expansion, it is going to have to forget about the question of whether to put a black face behind a counter or a black face on the other side of the counter, for that matter, being served by a white face. We are going to have to remove colour bars. We are going to have to train our people. I mean all our people, be they Coloured, White, Black or Indian. They are going to have to be trained to the best of their ability to play their part to the fullest degree in the development of this country. Otherwise we are going to stagnate. At the moment, I think the rate of development as far as the provision of telephones is concerned, is about 5.1 per cent per annum. I think that is the figure. It is low for this country. It is worked out at the moment on the basis of mainly white users. But the non-Whites are slowly but surely, despite all the attempts, artificial and otherwise, to block their progress, willy-nilly being used in positions of greater responsibility and they are increasing their earning capacity. The demand for telephones and telecommunication services generally is accordingly going to increase enormously.

This is the sort of thing that we should be planning for, not this stagnant rate, and the hon. the Minister must not worry about the political implications. I wish people would forget about provincial elections and start talking sound common sense and sound economics and worry about one thing and one thing only, and that is the development of this country. The hon the Minister will know the answer to the question that he posed, namely: “Will you use non-White labour?” The answer is: “Yes, one will use non-White labour.” That is the only sensible answer. I may say that if that were done many of the legitimate complaints of the public about the services, which are not due to the administrative staff —they are labouring under great difficulties because of the manpower shortage—will disappear. The difficulties encountered by the public—the crossed lines, the delays on trunk calls, the inability to make a complaint when you want to make one because “Comolaints” are always engaged—will be solved because the trained, already experienced staff can be shifted to supervisory tasks and to tasks where they will really be doing public relations work for the Post Office and dealing largely with the public as one trains non-Whites to fill those other posts. That is the only way to solve the labour shortage and the difficulties encountered by the telephone department at the present stage.

Sir, I want to put a question to the hon. the Minister that I put to his predecessor from whom I may say, I had a courteous if negative reply. Automatic exchanges are now being used more and more in South Africa; I think the hon. the Minister gave the figure of 75 per cent, or he said that by the end of the year the majority of the exchanges in the major centres would be automatic exchanges. Is it not possible to change the rates which are charged for long-distance calls as soon as an exchange goes automatic? At the present time we adopt the system of charging one and a half times the charge for a long-distance call if the call is made on a Sunday or a religious public holiday. Why do we not adopt the system used by other countries in the world in order to divert people from the business hours when people are making commercial calls? Why do we not charge half the rate, as is done in America and England, for long-distance calls made after 8 p.m. and on Sundays and on public holidays? The excuse always was that there was not sufficient staff for Sundays and holidays because staff had to be given time off. Once we are on automatic, surely it should be an easy matter and we would immediately relieve the congestion on long-distance lines by encouraging people to make calls outside of business hours.

Sir, I would like to congratulate the Department on the excellent oversea services that we now have. It is really a pleasure to make an oversea call these days, not that one makes them so often, but on the few occasions when one does make an oversea call, it is magnificent not only to have the call put through immediately but also to find that one gets an excellent reception. This is indeed a great improvement, and I might say that when visitors come to this country, the first yardstick that they use in deciding whether South Africa is indeed a modern industrial country, is the quality of the telephone services. I do not think many people have any complaints about our oversea service but I do not think that we can say the same about the internal services, and until we are realistic and courageous about tackling our manpower problem, these difficulties are going to face the hon. the Minister.

I have one final point to bring to his attention and that is whether he will not consider making some special arrangements for welfare organizations using bulk postage; whether some arrangement could not be made for them to use their welfare number on the outside of the envelope in the case of bulk postage and for them to get some substantial rebate to offset the really rather excessive additional charges levied by the hon. the Minister on postage.

It is worthy of note that the hon. member for Houghton does not let a single opportunity pass in which to make propaganda for the race integration policy of the Progressive Party. Even in a debate on telephones she has to make blatant propaganda for race integration. The hon. member adopted the attitude that it was time that South Africa made a choice about telephones and about race integration. I want to tell the hon. member that the Whites of South Africa have long since made up their minds on this matter, and in a debate on telephones we should like to speak to the hon. the Minister about the telephone matters of our constituencies. This is no place for that race integration propaganda of the Progressive Party, which was, in any case, completely rejected in the recent election. [Interjection.] While the hon. member for Houghton sits there and makes interjections, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to print a special telephone directory for the Houghton constituency with a mandarine and an “African” and the hon. member’s photograph on the front page, as Table Mountain is now printed on the Cape Town directory, if that will satisfy the hon. member.

You are just being stupid.

I should very much like to associate myself with the hon. member for Springs and the other hon. member who asked that in the planning of new townships provision should at the outset be made by the Post Office for telephone services and networks. As in my constituency, among others, it happens that new townships are already inhabited and hundreds of houses built and occupied, with even business premises being occupied, but that telephone services cannot easily be provided because planning is delayed for such a long time after the planning of the particular township. With my own principle town Verwoerdburg as an example, a town which is going to double its population within the course of a decade, you can realize, Sir. what an extensive task awaits the Post Office in only beginning to provide telephone services to that area after planning and after proclamation. We therefore want to ask the hon. Minister perhaps to begin the planning of such services at an earlier stage if possible, in order to have the services ready when the people begin to move in, however difficult it may appear at this stage. Because we have very real problems with hundreds and hundreds ol voters who move into these new areas, and with dozens of business men who occupy their business premises and begin doing business without the help of telephone services.

Then, with reference to page 8, subhead 4, of the Estimates of Capital Expenditure, I should very much like to express my great appreciation, on behalf of my voters, for the provision of the automatic telephone exchange, valued at R115,000, for Valhalla. It is going to supply a particular need, and it will help our voters to a very large extent; and likewise for the provision of an automatic telephone exchange for Eldoraigne, where a very large new township is developing, and where this telephone exchange can make a large contribution towards giving relief within the foreseeable future. Our constituency’s sincere appreciation to the hon. the Minister and the staff for that.

Then there is just one additional problem spot in my constituency that I should like to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention. The problem concerns the service to a certain portion of our agricultural area, i.e. the portion where our farmers live in the Welbekend area, which accommodates a very progressive farming community—that is to say a Nationalist progressive farming community, not a Houghton one. These people are served via Petit from the Witwatersrand telephone system. The chief business and social locales for that particular farming community are Bronkhorstspruit and Pretoria. If we want to dial that farming community directly from Verwoerdburg, and vice versa, this must take place via Petit, incurring very great delays. On behalf of that farming community I should also like to request the Minister’s attention for that area.

I want to refer to a few matters which concern my constituency in particular. The first is the microwave tower to which the Minister referred in his speech. We notice in the Estimates of Expenditure that R800.000 has been voted for that tower in the coming financial year. In addition, we notice that a little more than R1,700,000 has already been spent on this project and that a further R700,000 is still outstanding and will have to be voted at a later stage. Therefore we conclude that the building construction has virtually been completed and that only the finishing touches remain to be added. I am mentioning this matter because I want to afford the Minister an opportunity of submitting an interim report on the project to us. I can assure him that the inhabitants of the northern suburbs of Johannesburg will be particularly interested in it. I have not mentioned this matter before because I would perhaps have exposed myself to the charge that I was trying to stir up feelings. Nevertheless, I must say that feelings did in fact run high in the northern suburbs about the building of this tower. This tower is situated in the most densely populated part of South Africa. If you build a structure of more than 800 ft. in height there, you must inevitably cause disruption. In fact, I think the inhabitants of this part have been particularly tolerant in spite of the fact that they were inconvenienced tremendously. However, they cannot understand why this project had to be built on this particular site. Government sources said that this particular tower had to have a certain height and that it had to be built near the existing cable network. We accept this, but the inhabitants there are more and more beginning to think that this is but another example of the characteristic lack of long-term planning, which has become so typical of this Government. It would therefore help if the Minister could give us an indication of the advantages which would result from this project for the ordinary man. It has been indicated that a revolving restaurant will be built in the tower. Something like this may be of importance to some people. In this connection, I should like to know which groups of our society will have access to this restaurant. What will be done about the additional traffic which such a restaurant will attract, especially in an area where parking facilities are already so limited? It has also been said that a special purpose of this tower is to install an automatic telephone exchange there and that this would facilitate telephonic communication with overseas countries. Once again, this is something which is of importance to many of us, but the Minister will agree that most people simply want a telephone so that they can dial the person across the road if necessary. As far as this is concerned, the situation is of course becoming worse by the day. Let me relate something from my personal experience. One day, before we came here for the Parliamentary session, I tried to dial the Minister of Planning. Well, I had to dial seven times before I got through. What is important, is that I had to pay for seven calls. No wonder the hon. the Minister can show such a large profit, because we are paying for services which we are not receiving! This, of course, is also what Mrs. Waring tried to put across in different terms the other day.

Another matter to which I want to refer is the Post Office in Hillbrow. The most recent survey shows that there are approximately 50,000 people living in Hillbrow. In addition, there are a considerable number of businesses, such as banks. To a certain extent, Hillbrow serves as a display window for South Africa, because so many of our immigrants go there. Most of the visitors to South Africa find themselves in Hillbrow as well. Under these circumstances, one may expect that their first contact with the State, through the Post Office, should be a good advertisement for the Government. But I can assure you that the post office in Hillbrow is housed in a rented building. My information is that the floor space of this post office is just over 4,000 sq. ft. The permanent staff consists of 15 Whites and a certain number of non-Whites. If I say that this post office is totally inadequate, I am putting it as euphemistically as possible. I do not know what sort of office facilities they have there. The postmaster, however, is in a little place no larger and no better than a dove-cote, and he is after all a senior official. I think we ought to be able to do better than this. The present facilities are an extremely bad advertisement, not only for the Government, but also for South Africa. I understand that the Department plans to build a new post office. Initially we were told that this new post office could be occupied in 1974. But now I understand that it will not be available before 1976, “owing to unforeseen circumstances”. Of course, this is a refrain which we are becoming used to. In any case, I understand that this post office will be built in the centre in which the automatic telephone exchange is to be housed. This will be on the other side of the hill, outside the business centre and beyond the reach of all the elderly people who must go and draw their pensions every month. I should like to extend a personal invitation to the hon. the Minister to visit Hill-brow. I should like to entertain him there. In fact, he may find it reasonably interesting to take a look at Hillbrow, provided he looks at the post office as well.

Must we do house-to-house visiting?

We can do that as well. I just want to warn the hon. the Minister, and I am not threatening him, that if he does not accompany me to look at the post office, I shall ask Mrs. Waring to come along. Mrs. Waring, of course, has the habit of expressing things in an extremely interesting and stimulating manner. Perhaps she will succeed in stimulating the hon. the Minister further in regard to this matter.

The hon. member for Hillbrow introduced matters of a local nature here. Let me say immediately that I am very unfamiliar with Hillbrow and with the things happening there. I have already been there, though, but of course I do not know the place as well as the hon. member does. But the Minister knows of the matters the hon. member raised, and he will probably supply the hon. member with an answer.

A small matter which the hon. member mentioned, and which I cannot simply let pass, is the isolated case he spoke of where he had to dial seven times before he could get through. Is it now really big of an hon. member to quote isolated cases here in the House in an attempt to prove that a service is poor?

It is not an isolated case.

I should like the hon. member to calculate what percentage these isolated cases are of the total number of calls made. Someone near me here says that a computer would be necessary, but I think they still have to invent such a computer.

They constitute one-third of the total.

It is a waste of time, on my part as well, to react to such a trifling matter, but I am doing so just to point out the pettiness of the Opposition when they take part in a debate such as this.

I also have a problem I want to broach here. It has become almost a habit with us to convert a Committee Stage into a kind of begging debate.

I have a small matter that I should very much like to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention. Before I put that request of mine to him I first want to settle another small matter with the hon. Opposition. I put a few reasonable questions to the members of the Opposition with regard to the promises they made in their booklet to which I referred. The questions concerned the capital needed to implement the promises they made. In spite of the fact that more than half a dozen hon. members on that side of the House have already taken part in the debate, not one of them has yet had the decency to clear this up for me. I would so very much like to know where the Opposition is going to find the capital with which to implement those promises. I therefore now ask whether hon. members would not please explain that to me. I would appreciate it very much, however difficult I may find it to appreciate anything emanating from that side of the House. Sometimes, however, one tries to force oneself into a position of at least being civil towards them.

The matter I should like to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention is something that is bothering me in connection with the payments of overtime to our staff, in the country districts in particular. I am not familiar with the circumstances in the large urban complexes. I do not know what the working conditions of staff members there are. Let us look at the Postmaster-General’s Report, in which statistics are supplied for 1967. I am only referring to one item, i.e. the handling of letters. According to the report, 543 million ordinary letters were handled in 1967-’68. In 1968 the amount already increased to 558 million. If one therefore makes an ordinary calculation, and allows for a 5.5 per cent growth rate, the expected figure for 1970-’71 will probably increase to more than 600 million ordinary letters. It is not only the large urban complexes that handle these items. The post offices in the country districts also do so. We are also experiencing a staff shortage there, and it is more serious in some areas than in others. There are, of course, areas where there is an almost full complement of staff. In those cases where there is a staff shortage totalling about 30 per cent of the ordinary complement, great demands are made on the staff. I know that the hon. the Minister is very sympathetically disposed to this. He is aware of it. The Postmaster-General and senior members of the staff are also well aware of it. With reference to a system which is already being applied, I want to advocate that the formula be amended slightly and that the payments for overtime be adjusted to the actual shortage of staff. In other words, if there is a 30 per cent staff shortage, the actual number of workers available are compelled to carry out the normal duties. The post cannot be allowed to mount up, and telephone accounts cannot be allowed to lie around for months without being handled. This is done promptly in the majority of cases. If this is not done, piling up takes place and delays occur. We know that the reduced staff in those particular post offices are furnishing excellent services. I now ask whether that formula cannot be amended slightly, to the benefit of those staff members who sometimes have to work for up to 10 and 12 hours a day. What I find remarkable is that I have not yet encountered a post office staff member who has complained about the hours of overtime he has had to work. They do so willingly and with enthusiasm. Could we then not compensate them a little more than is the case at present? It would be a wonderful incentive. I do not believe that there has even been anyone in South Africa who has worked himself to death. I do not believe that the post office staff will eventually work themselves to death, but I think that they feel that we should do a little more for them. I therefore want to ask the hon. the Minister to amend the policy he is already applying in such a way that those people are better compensated, more specifically in the case of the offices in the country districts, where there is a manpower shortage.

I also want to say that I have never before encountered such a feeling of pleasure and satisfaction among our officials in the country districts as I have encountered there now. It speaks volumes for the treatment they are receiving, from the higher ranks down to their immediate superiors. We also thank the hon. the Minister for the introduction of this merit system. It is one of the measures that is making our officials particularly happy. It is because of their comprehensive services to us that I am making this plea on their behalf this afternoon.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Harrismith seems to be worried that when we come to power, we will not be able to carry out the promises which have been made in the little yellow handbook to which he referred. The hon. member wants to know where the money will come from. There is a perfectly simple answer to this question. When we are in power we will have such a flourishing economy that the question of finding the capital for those jobs will present no difficulty whatsoever. He need therefore not worry about that aspect of the matter.

The hon. member for Algoa is not here at the moment. Yesterday he questioned the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (District) about a statement he had made, namely that we were against a commission to investigate the question of television. We are not against a commission to investigate the technical details and the technological problems connected with television. What we want is a Government that has the courage of its convictions and-comes out openly and says that we are going to have television and then appoints a commission to investigate what will be the best way to introduce that service.

There are one or two matters that affect my constituency that I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister. Firstly, there is the question of a broadcasting studio in Port Elizabeth. We have been asking for this for a long time and we have been advised that the ground has been set aside. The municipality made this ground available to the department at a very reasonable rate on the understanding that a broadcasting studio would be established in Port Elizabeth. Unfortunately, there is no indication whatsoever that steps are being taken to erect this studio. I feel that we have a strong claim to make on the Department of Posts and Telegraphs to get on with that venture. I am sure the hon. the Minister realizes that the city of Port Elizabeth plays a very important part in the Eastern Cape. It has a very rapidly expanding European population and, above all, in recent years the city has acquired a university that is growing from strength to strength. With this university which has a very well developed department of music, the city is now in a position to make far better use than ever before of a broadcasting studio. Apart from this I think it is safe to claim that Port Elizabeth is one of the most drama-conscious cities in the whole of the Republic. There are drama schools, both Afrikaans and English, that take a tremendous pride in their work. There is for instance the Port Elizabeth Music and Dramatic Society which concentrates mainly on plays. It also has its Afrikaans counterpart which is very active. There is the Gilbert and Sullivan Dramatic Society which regularly provides plays and musicals. We have a Coloured community which is tremendously interested in music. They have their societies which could well benefit by being able to make use of a broadcasting studio.

Are they allowed to play Beethoven?

That I do not know, but I presume it will be the case in the course of time.

Port Elizabeth is the venue of many international sporting events. It is the home of some outstanding sporting personalities of the Republic. I believe that all round we have a claim to make to the hon. the Minister that this matter shall not be postponed any longer. He has assured me that within the next four years the building of the studio will take place. I do not know whether the delay is due to the fact that the hon. the Minister is waiting until television is introduced. It may be that when this studio is built in Port Elizabeth, it will be built in such a way that it will provide a television broadcasts. This may be the cause of the delay, but I should like to hear the hon. the Minister’s comment on this delay. If we can get this television service, it would be something wonderful. Then we will all be able to see the wonderful test matches which are played in this country. I certainly know, and I think other hon. members know too, how difficult it is to obtain tickets to see these matches. If we could have television, this difficult problem would be solved.

There is another matter I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister. I have had complaints on several occasions from my constituents that there is a long delay in airmail correspondence between Port Elizabeth and Johannesburg. As an example, I should like to refer to a letter which I have here with me. This letter was posted with airmail stamps in Johannesburg on the 8th. It only arrived in Port Elizabeth on the 13th, five days later. This seems to happen quite often. It is not for me to suggest where the delay is. Certainly it cannot be due to a shortage of personnel. I hope the hon. the Minister will not raise the excuse that there is a shortage of staff. There must be some other reason for it. Postal deliveries are satisfactorily carried out in Port Elizabeth. Use is being made of Coloured postmen. They do their job well. There are many more Coloured available for employment if one of the bottlenecks should possibly be a staff shortage. I believe that they have this problem in Blairgowrie in Johannesburg too. There the postal distribution is only carried out three times a week. This particular suburb falls in the constituency of Rand-burg. I do not know whether the hon. member for Randburg has experienced this difficulty. However, I am advised that the distribution of mail in this particular area is quite a problem.

Finally, we have another problem in Port Elizabeth. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister what the position is in regard to the question of ships that dock in the Port Elizabeth Harbour. We understand that there has been a tremendous increase in the charge which is involved in connecting the telephones of the ships that dock in the harbour. I believe it was in the region of R4 and that this amount has been raised to something like R24. This seems to me a completely unjustifiable charge, and I should like the hon. the Minister to give an explanation as to why this should be the case. Sir, we have already discussed in this debate the question of the employment of non-White personnel, but I do want to say to the hon. the Minister that the use of coloured postmen has been instituted in two areas in Port Elizabeth, and in particular in my own constituency, and that this is working very well. If the Minister has a problem in finding sufficient workmen to speed up the distribution of mail, he should not hesitate in future to make more use of these people, who are doing this job efficiently and well.

Mr. Chairman, I listened carefully to what the hon. member for Walmer said. I expected him to reply to the challenge, if I may put it that way, which the hon. member for Harrismith directed at the Opposition. He asked them to tell us how they, in the light of the promises they made in this propaganda publication, intended rectifying all these matters in connection with the shortage of telephones and the problems of the Post Office. In this propaganda publication they stated that they would make more capital available with a view to providing more telephones. It was also implied that they would keep the tariffs constant, i.e. that they would not increase the tariffs. The tariff increases are in fact something they have criticized in this debate. In addition, they said that they would improve the salaries of the staff. We should like to know how they intend fulfilling all these promises. They have not yet given us a reply in this regard.

In his reply to the Second Reading debate, the hon. the Minister referred to various areas where there are acute telephone shortages. Among others, he mentioned the Pretoria area. Those of us who represent constituencies in the eastern part of Pretoria, know that tremendous expansion has taken place there in the past decade or slightly less than that. The expansion was such that a much greater demand for telephone services inevitably arose. We know that such services cannot be provided with the existing facilities. However, we also know that the Minister and his senior staff have been very obliging towards us in this connection, and that they considered our requests sympathetically. I personally contacted the Minister and his senior officials in connection with this matter. In view of the expansion which is taking place in my constituency and in the north-eastern and eastern parts of Pretoria, I am very pleased to see in item 74 of subhead 4 of file Estimates of Capital Expenditure that the automatic telephone exchange at Queenswood is going to be enlarged. This telephone exchange was completed only a few years ago. It had hardly been in use for a year before there was again a shortage of telephones. We hope that this enlargement will be such that it will provide not only for the existing needs, but also for the possible demand which may arise in future, in view of the fact that expansion is continuing in that vicinity.

I should also like to refer to item 129, where it is indicated that an automatic telephone exchange is to be installed at Silverton, which is also in my constituency. That area has also expanded tremendously, and on behalf of the electorate and the public in that vicinity I should like to express our sincere thanks to the Minister for the telephone exchange which is to be built there. The hon. member for Harrismith said that we should not turn this debate into a begging debate. In the first place, I should like to thank the hon. the Minister for providing a mobile post office in a part of my constituency where it was very necessary, as the area is expanding rapidly, namely Jan Niemand Park. That mobile post office serves the purpose for the time being. However, we foresee that this mobile post office will soon no longer be adequate, and therefore we want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider making a permanent post office available there in the not too distant future.

I should like to return to a matter raised here yesterday. I have already spoken about the South African Broadcasting Corporation, but after I had spoken in the Second Reading debate, an attack was made here on the South African Broadcasting Corporation and it was alleged that it allowed itself to be used for party political purposes. The hon. the Minister gave an adequate reply to this allegation and reaffirmed the assurance which he gave last year, namely that in the event of such a complaint being lodged, he would have the matter investigated. The new hon. member for Durban (Central) in fact followed the pattern which was set as an example by the hon. member for Orange Grove in the past, i.e. simply making a wild allegation and not substantiating it. This is what the hon. member for Durban (Central) also did yesterday. He did launch an attack, but he did not mention one single example where the South African Broadcasting Corporation had been guilty of what he alleged. Allegations are usually made against the programme “Current Affairs” by hon. members on the other side. We know that “Current Affairs” can be regarded as the editorial of the South African Broadcasting Corporation. In my hand I have copies of the talks in the S.A.B.C. survey “Current Affairs” from the beginning of the year till the end of July. I challenge hon. members on the other side to show me where the bounds were overstepped in this programme, which has so often been subjected to criticism by the United Party. One cannot but express one’s deep appreciation and thanks to the staff of the S.A.B.C. for the originality displayed by them. I want to thank them for the initiative, resourcefulness,. capability and sound judgment shown by them. When one bears in mind that the total broadcasting time of all the S.A.B.C.’s programme services, including news bulletins, domestic and foreign, amounted to 1,683 hours a week at the end of 1969, it gives one some idea of the tremendous task which this Staff must perform. There is no getting away from the fact that one person likes some particular programme and another does not. One person wants Fanus Rautenbach’s head on a dish and another starts crying out the moment he hears that programme may possibly be discontinued. It simply is a fact that people do not all like the same programmes. On the whole, however, we believe that the S.A.B.C. provides its listening public with something which everyone likes in some or other programme. We want to congratulate the staff on that. I want to conclude by saying that I believe that the South African Broadcasting Corporation is outstandingly successful in fulfilling the task entrusted to it.

Mr. Chairman, if time allows, I shall come back to the hon. member for Koedoespoort, but before doing so, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to make a special effort to expedite the provision of telephone services to Bothasig, and especially the new part of Milnerton in my constituency. I am requesting this especially in respect of Bothasig, because this is a residential area which was established by the State. For years it has been presented as a display window of the Department of Community Development, and to this day I cannot understand how the Department could have established the housing scheme there without in any way planning in advance for telephone services.

We have now reached a stage in which it seems to me it is a privilege to have a telephone. Surely the telephone has become part of the modern way of life. Any person who tells me that it is a privilege to have a telephone in these modern times, simply does not understand life. Bothasig has been in existence for five years, and for years numbers of people have been struggling in vain to get telephone services. I know the position. The difficulties are of a fundamental nature, but my request to the hon. the Minister this afternoon is that he should make a special effort to expedite the provision of services in Bothasig. Bothasig is a neat, exclusive community which is building up a fine spirit, except for the drawback that they have no telephone services at all. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that the services which have been provided so far, are not satisfactory. They are simply not good enough for a community which was established there under the auspices of the State. The State ought to do better than that.

In the second place, I should like to return to the question of television. I should just like to tell the hon. the Minister that it is beyond my understanding why he is so afraid to express his views on the matter. The hon. the Minister appointed a commission. This commission now has to act as his conscience, as it were. He personally has not yet decided whether he wants television or not. The commission must now act as the censor of public opinion. This is what it in fact amounts to. The commission must now tell us whether television is a good idea or not. I think the hon. the Minister should really make up his mind now. The people want television. The fact that we have to ask him here across the floor, “Do you want it or not?”, and the hon. the Minister remains silent, speaks volumes to me about his lack of conviction in this regard.

Lastly, Sir, in the two minutes left to me, I want to come to the hon. member for Koedoespoort. He wanted to support the hon. the Minister’s attitude that the Broadcasting Corporation is by no means guilty of broadcasting anything which smacks of political propaganda. We know the Broadcasting Corporation. We know “Current Affairs”. I want to remind the Minister of his words, namely, “As long as they do not talk party politics”. Now I should like to ask him: When I use the term “separate development”, and it is supported every day by “Current Affairs”, what does this imply? [Interjections.] In South African usage “separate development” has only one meaning, namely the Nationalist policy.

It is the policy of the country.

Sir, there you have it from the mouth of an hon. Minister: It is the policy of the country. Since when has the Nationalist Party been the country of South Africa? This autocratic line of thought which equates the State and the party, comes to the fore clearly here. Every day “Current Affairs” supports the ideology of the Nationalist Party. One cannot pinpoint anything and say “There it is, clear as a bell”. The best propaganda in the world is when the propagandist conceals the motive, and by means of “Current Affairs” the S.A.B.C. succeeds eminently in concealing the Nationalist motive of its propaganda. This is the truth of the matter. We will listen very carefully in future, and I want to tell the hon. the Minister that he is satisfying nobody when he says that the S.A.B.C. does not talk party politics. Every day apartheid is sold over the radio under another name; every day the public is encouraged to support apartheid—the policy of that party and not of the South African State. (Interjections.] Sir, hon. members on that side are smarting. One just takes a shot in the dark and then one gets this howling. One day we will bring chapter and verse to the Minister and then he will have to admit that the Boardcasting Corporation, which falls under his control, is trying to influence the public to vote for the Nationalist Party. I have only one consolation, Sir: After all the years of broadcasting and of “Current Affairs”, people are voting for the United Party to an increasing extent.

Sir, I fail to understand how Bothasig, which was actually the display window of Community Development, could send to this House a person who makes such a poor show. The hon. member said that the hon. the Minister lacked conviction, and that he did not want to say whether or not he was going to introduce television, and that he was sitting there, waiting for the report of the commission. Why, then, are commissions appointed?

Do you want television?

Nobody would be foolish enough to introduce television just like that, without being in possession of the facts. The hon. the Minister acted wisely, as all National Ministers and the Government have always done. He appointed a commission in order that they may gather the facts and then present a report to him. I want to ask those hon. members whether they think one can take a decision as serious as this one, without the matter having been investigated by a commission. They are the very people who are continually and incessantly asking for commissions. This year we had another example of this in this House. They wanted the legislation relating to 15-year-old girls to be referred to a select committee. The hon. the Minister used his common sense and took a decision by himself. Why did hon. members want to refer this measure to a select committee? No, Sir, that hon. member does not know what he is saying. He could not even speak for a full two minutes, but he came forward here with such an inept statement.

Mr. Chairman, I want to transport this Committee for a moment to something else, to a pleasant, beautiful place, and that is our splendid administrative capital, Pretoria, our capital with its more than 300 miles of streets and more than 5,000 jacaranda trees which will once again delight the eye in October. I hope that all members will go there to see what that beautiful city looks like in October. It is my privilege to live in Pretoria, and I am grateful for it and I feel proud of the fact that in these Estimates provision is being made for R270,000 for a lovely suburb, i.e. Sunnyside, as well as R30 million for a general post office. Sir, Pretoria is our administrative capital, and now that this new post office is about to be erected there, I want to ask the hon. the Minister to see to it that there will be proper planning. We have a Greater Pretoria Planning Committee under Mr. Justice Kobie Marais; in addition we have other organizations which are continually working on the planning of Pretoria; we have the Pretoria City Council, people who have the right views and outlook and who are South Africans, nationally orientated people who have the interests of South Africa at heart and who seek only the best for our capital. A bulky document on the planning of Pretoria has been drafted by Professor P. J. van der Walt, and I am grateful for the fact that the Pretoria City Council has displayed so much vision in seeing to it that Pretoria is planned in such a way that it will remain the most beautiful city in South Africa, for that is what it is today.

Pretoria is the city which has the fastest development rate in the whole of Africa. As the old post office is now being replaced by a new one, I hope that it will be done in such a way that it will attract to this city tourists from all over the world. When the new post office, as well as that of Sunnyside, is being planned, I hope that, as there are many traffic bottlenecks in Pretoria, provision will be made for parking under the post office building or perhaps on its roof. The time will still arrive when parking for helicopters on the roof of that building will be necessary. We want it to be planned on a sufficiently large scale and to be a credit to the city. As a part of the old Mint Building and the old post office will have to be demolished, I want to ask whether a replica of those buildings cannot be made, a replica which may then be placed in the entrance hall of the new post office, for we know how beautiful those buildings are, but how will future generations know this? Of course, the Minister of Planning is partially involved in this too, i.e. in the sense that he is to ensure that the planning of Pretoria is carried out properly. To the east of Church Square we have the Republic Square, which consists of the J. G. Strydom and the H. F. Verwoerd Squares. Where this post office is being planned, it will be an anchor in the west, and in the future something will have to be built between Church Square and Republic Square, a building which will serve as an attraction and which will leave the world speechless at the far-sightedness displayed by the present generation.

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion I want to say just this: Pretoria is grateful for the fact that the hon. the Minister has come forward so soon in providing it with a good service as far as the post office is concerned, for the post office in Pretoria concerns every member in this House. This is where the headquarters of our Cabinet and our Administration are. Each and every hon. member who is sitting here, has to telephone Pretoria. continually; they have to visit the Departments in Pretoria all the time. If. through the new post office, they are afforded the service which this Government is going to afford them, the Opposition will in future only be able to praise the Government and never be able to complain again.

Sir, the hon. member for Sunnyside praised Pretoria as a beautiful city and I do not disagree with him but I am prepared at any time to debate with him the merits of Durban against those of Pretoria. Of course, we on this side of the House remember the hon. member for Sunny-side for another reason entirely and I was a little amused when he discussed television here even in passing, because, if I remember rightly, that was the hon. member who not more than a couple of years ago made a speech at some length about mini-skirts.

What does that have to do with the Post Office?

He was one of those people who was very much against it. It is no wonder to me that he is probably also against television.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss with the hon. the Minister the question of television just briefly. He said that one of the reasons for appointing a commission to go info the introduction of television in South Africa was that one must go into the costs; that we must realize that there is already a shortage of labour and that television would aggravate that labour shortage. My colleague the hon. member for Wynberg replied to some extent by saying that television would supply its own labour. Sir, over the years we in this House have been told from time to time what television would cost the country. We have been given all sorts of figures both by the hon. the Minister and by the previous Minister, but I would like to say to the Minister that if his problem is the cost and the question of labour, then I challenge him to say here and now that we can have television in South Africa if it is introduced by private enterprise. If this is his problem, let private enterprise do it because there is no question at all that if television was introduced in South Africa we would get all the labour and all the technicians we need. In fact, it would be a boost to immigration and we could do with that in other spheres as well. If the hon. the Minister is worried about the cost, then I say to him that private enterprise would take up the challenge at the drop of a hat.

There are one or two other matters with which I would like to deal. In the Railway debate I said that if the Government’s labour policy was to be seen to work, it would be on the Railways, and one could say, too, that if the Government’s labour policy is to be seen to work it will work under the Post Office, because with its protections and its monopolies, if it is going to work, surely it will work here. It is interesting to note that the Post Office have in fact increased the number of white workers, white employees of the Post Office, over the last five years by some 5,000 employees. The figure as revealed in answer to a question in this House is that the number of Whites in the Post Office has increased by 5 000 over the last five years, whereas on the Railways it decreased by 3,000 in the same period. [Interjections.] If you keep quiet you might learn something; even in Witbank they have problems. But despite this the Minister cannot supply the country with the normal needs of a civilized community. The shortage of telephones is increasing and our postal services get worse, yet he has drawn from the available manpower in South Africa an extra 5.000 Whites over the last five years. How much more does he expect to draw from them? Surely that is the maximum he can draw from those people who are available. But what happens? Because he cannot find the answers under the Government’s philosophy, he starts to cripple the economy.

That is absolute nonsense.

If you listen you will see how much nonsense it is. The only nonsense in this House comes from that side of the House. Sir, the interesting point here is that because they cannot meet the demands of a modern society they increase postal rates and they increase the cost of installing and transferring telephones. I had a telephone message this morning from Durban. A business I know with a small exchange and two telephones had to have their telephones transferred less than 75 yards from one office building to another, and when the Bill arrived it was for R140. Sir, R140 to move two small telephones, and it took two hours’ work. They were timed. This is the sort of thing that this Minister and his Department are deliberately doing because they cannot keep up with the development in South Africa, and then we get this sort of answer. The Minister gets up in the House and says they only employ non-white postmen in non-white areas to serve their own communities, but they do employ non-white postmen in white areas only on a temporary basis.

Sir, those non-white postmen serving the white areas have been on a temporary basis for years and years and they will go on being on a temporary basis for years and years to come. But the interesting thing about it is that it is mean, because it means that these non-Whites who are on a temporary basis lose all the advantages of permanent employees in the service. [Interjections.] I will repeat it a thousand times if it will sink into your head. These people have been employed on a temporary basis for five or six years, and because of that they lose all the advantages of permanent employment. What sort of state of affairs is this? And then the Minister will get up in the next debate on his Vote and say he is employing so many more hundreds or thousands of non-Whites. Sir, I think the time has come when the electorate of South Africa is entitled to look at this Department, as at other Government Departments, and say it has done nothing in 22 years to solve our problems.

The hon. member for Port Natal will perhaps excuse me if I do not follow him in his “repeater .22” speech. I prefer to discuss a few matters in my own constituency.

When there is a shortage of telephone facilities like there is in my constituency, the applications which are handed in at the Department are referred to a merit committee to decide whether priority should be given to certain applications or not. It does happen that an application received from a business undertaking is given priority over an application received from an ordinary house-dweller, because the business man is dependent for his living on the telephone service which is made available. Others to whom priority is given as far as the allocation of telephones is concerned, are people who can furnish the Department with a medical certificate. Their applications receive priority over those of an ordinary nature. Then there are also private individuals to whom a telephone service is provided at their private dwellings because their offices are accommodated in their private dwellings. Applicants who do not fall into this category, then have to wait their turn. It is unfortunately the case that there are certain residential areas in my constituency which adjoin a very important industrial area, the Wadeville industrial area, which is a major industrial area in the Germiston complex, and from the nature of the case and because business undertakings and industrial undertakings are established there, the private house dwellers in the surrounding areas have to compete with the business undertakings in obtaining telephone services. I know the Department was doing everything in its power a number of years ago when 3.500 lines were provided, but in view of the rapid economic expansion those lines were all allocated within a period of seven months with the result that practically no consideration was given to private persons. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is not possible in cases where such conflicting interests exist with private individuals on the one hand and an industrial complex on the other hand, that a certain percentage of the telephones could be made available to private individuals.

The other minor matter I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister also concerns the allocation of telephones, and in this respect I want to advance a plea on behalf of our aged. In my constituency we have an area known as “Staatsdorp”, where many pensioners live; you know, Sir, once you reach an advanced age after you have served your country and after you have retired on pension and have settled in a certain place, as happens in my constituency, it goes without saying that the older you get the more medical services you need. These pensioners are in a very difficult position not only because they are no longer able to drive a motor-car but because they find it difficult to get on and off buses and are sometimes urgently in need of medical services. I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is not possible to give priority to elderly people when the allocation of telephones is under consideration so as to make it easier for them to obtain telephones. I know they can get telephones on production of medical certificates, but sometimes these people are not so seriously ill as to warrant a certificate from a doctor to get a telephone, although the person concerned may urgently require a telephone because of frailty. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to give his serious consideration to this matter.

In conclusion, there is one minor matter and in dealing with that I want to come back to what happened here yesterday. I notice that I still have one minute left. The hon. member for Jeppes yesterday mentioned a certain area in his constituency which has to dial over the border to a different telephone exchange are and which then counts as two metered calls. I just want to say that I had a similar case in my constituency in respect of Wadeville, which is situated in the Germiston municipal area, although it falls under a different telephone exchange area. I want to tell him that I had made representations to the Department and that the matter was subsequently rectified. The hon. member should therefore approach the Department himself as regards this matter. I also wish to avail myself of this opportunity of expressing our sincere gratitude in public to the Minister and his Department for having rectified this matter in my constituency.

During the limited time at my disposal I should like to limit myself to a problem which is a problem not only for my constituents but for everybody throughout South Africa. I refer to the installation charge of R20 receivers of new telephones shall have to pay from now on. This R20 is not to be refundable. Only last week one of my own constituents applied for a telephone and was told to pay the R20 for its installation. He was told that he ought to be very satisfied because he would be given the choice of six various coloured telephones— pink, blue, ivory, black or any other colour he likes. He then thought he had better make the best of the R20. He first of all wanted to know whether he would get a telephone and he was told he would, and that on top of it he would have a choice of six colours. He thereupon chose ivory. He was moving to another place about three streets away from the house in which he was living. So they came along with a huge van, as large almost as a pantechnicon, to move this telephone. This huge van arrived at the new house with the telephone in it, together with the jack which they had removed from the other house for installation in the new house, three streets down. But what did he find? He found that it was not the ivory telephone he ordered, but a black one and not a new one, but the same instrument he had before. Would you believe it, Mr. Chairman, that the cost for the installation of his telephone cost him more than the removal of his furniture? This is a fact; I saw the man only yesterday, and I saw where they have moved the telephone from the one house to the other. A thing I would like the Minister to consider is, why when a telephone is moved from one house to the other the jack is removed as well? Surely, the next tenant is also going to apply for a telephone and if the jack is left, it will be there for the new telephone. But, no, they take the complete instrument out, together with the jack, and install it in the other house—a lot of unnecessary work and extra expense. No wonder that it costs R20 to install one telephone. This is leading to a lot of complaints coming in. I am sure these complaints are lodged to hon. members opposite too, although they are not man enough to admit it.

There is another matter we are worried about. We have heard of the beautiful city of Pretoria. We have beautiful cities all over South Africa, also East London. Now imagine these cities without television. A commission of inquiry was duly appointed before the election and wherever we addressed meetings during the election we were told not to worry because a commission had been appointed to investigate the matter and that television would come. A large percentage of the electorate was satisfied in this way. They seemed to be convinced that television was coming. But now, after the election, the hon. the Minister seems not to be interested in any report from the commission. If there is doubt about the acceptability of TV let us call for a referendum and let the people decide. I guarantee that not more than 10 per cent of the people would vote against it. We have heard such a lot about the “volkswil” but when we challenge them to hold a referendum to determine the “volkswil”, they will not do it. [Interjections.] I do not believe they have got rid of all the verkramptes.

Before the election the S.A.B.C. was approached with a request to give all parties an equal opportunity for stating their respective policies. We were told that it was not necessary because both parties would be given ample coverage by broadcasting news items on the speeches of the main speakers. Well, we had no option but to accept this. But what happened? Every day we had to listen to the speeches being broadcast by Cabinet Ministers; news items of three, four or five Cabinet Ministers’ speeches would be broadcast, against one of our main speakers. This is the reason possibly why we won more seats. And one can assume that the more speeches they broadcast in future, the more seats would we win.

It is clear that the hon. member for East London (North) did not have a great deal to say for himself. Actually, he did not want to speak, but was instructed by his side to do so. I do not think he seriously intended speaking. In any case, the hon. member referred to the installation fee of telephones. But in all other countries of the world such fees are being charged, in Norway even as much as R70. The average cost of installing a telephone varies from R200 to R300, and therefore I think the Post Office is completely justified in charging an installation fee of R20.

The hon. member for Wynberg was somewhat upset with me—I do not know why. She told me I behaved like a teacher by putting questions to her. Well, I can give the hon. member the assurance that I have never been a teacher in my life, and therefore I do not know in what way a teacher acts. The hon. member will concede that I put my questions in a very amiable way, and that the matter of putting questions has been a practice in this House for many years. The hon. member asked for an open dialogue to be started about the nature of a television service. But surely that opportunity has been created by the appointment of the commission, because any;-one who has any ideas to exchange, can do so before that commission. Otherwise, they can put down their ideas in writing and forward them in to the commission. As regards the refusal of permission for three Bantu children to take part in a Beethoven concert over the air,

I have already said that I do not interfere with the programmes broadcast by the S.A.B.C. After all, I cannot give an account here of the programmes of the S.A.B.C.; surely that is an impossible task and the hon. member probably realizes this. And, as I said yesterday to the hon. member for Orange Grove, too, this hon. member will not accept me as a better judge of programmes than the S.A.B.C. itself. Therefore it is mere pretension on their part when they ask me to give my opinion on a certain programme. If I start doing so now and if I create the precedent, it will result in an impossible state of affair, because I shall have to give an account here of every programme. And that, after all, is not my task and function; it is the task and function of the Control Board of the S.A.B.C.

The hon. member for Springs dealt with the Selcourt Post Office and the automatic telephone exchange there. The hon. member brought this matter to my attention before. The latest information I have, is that the building in which the exchange will be accommodated, will be completed by December this year and that the new exchange will be completed by April, 1972. However, I am giving attention to the possibility of expediting this, and I shall give a full reply to the question of the hon. member as soon as possible. As far as a new post office for Springs is concerned, we cannot say at this stage when construction work on a new building will be commenced. Planning is underway, but this is a big project and I can only say there will not be any unnecessary delay.

The hon. member for Houghton discussed cheaper tariffs. The hon. member said she had brought the matter to the attention of my predecessor, too, and had received a very courteous reply. She also brought the matter to my attention before, and I hope that my reply will be just as courteous as that of my predecessor. I want to tell her that it will be economical to give consideration to cheaper night rates, and that from a point of view of staff, too, such rates will be practical, only when the automation of the telecommunication system of the country has advanced more. It is the intention to give further consideration to the matter as soon as the remaining big cities, i.e. Cape Town and Durban, have been linked up with the automatic direct dialling system. Cape Town will be linked up with the system by the end of the year and Durban is expected to be linked up by the middle of next year. Then we shall be able to reconsider the matter.

The hon. member for Houghton also asked for bulk mail of welfare organizations, on which their stamp appears, to be accepted at a cheaper rate. As I indicated earlier on this Session in reply to a question, the position in this connection is that the Post Office is not legally competent to make a distinction between welfare organizations and the general public as far as postage rates are concerned. If welfare organizations are to be subsidized by the State, it is, in the first place, a matter for the Treasury. The hon. member must realize that the Post Office is a business enterprise. I think that as far as this problem is concerned, she should rather negotiate with the Minister of Finance.

Sir, if I do not reply in the correct order from now on, you must please forgive me. The hon. member for Brentwood asked us to take steps so as to ensure that township development will not take place without provision being made for essential telephone services. This is, of course, not something which falls under the control of my department. I think the hon. member should raise this matter under the Vote of another Minister.

In connection with the encouragement of thrift at the Savings Bank, I may just say that the Post Office is undertaking the work of the Savings Bank, which, in fact, falls under the Department of Finance. That department has a thrift organization. Post Office officials also encourage thrift as far as it is in their power to do so. Post Office savings bank facilities are available at all post offices in the Republic and withdrawals may be made on demand throughout the country. Withdrawal facilities for larger amounts exist only at specific branches. The hon. member will appreciate that we are, in fact, only acting as agents for the Minister of Finance.

The hon. member for Hillbrow apologized for being unable to be present, but I want to tell him that the J. G. Strydom tower is rapidly nearing completion. It will probably be possible to put the tower into operation formally and officially during the first few months of next year. The hon. member himself gave the most important reasons for the decision to build the tower in Hillbrow. The tower was essential to ensure that the department’s microwave system on the Rand would not be disrupted. The tower will be an important tourist attraction. Apart from look-out facilities, a high-class restaurant with a revolving floor will be provided. From the point of view of Hillbrow, the tower ought to be an asset. Important civic bodies and town planners were consulted in advance. A new post office building is being provided at the tower site. I cannot indicate when the building will be ready, but matters will be expedited as far as possible. I said previously—I think it was in February— in this House, that non-Whites would not be admitted to the tower. Hillbrow need not fear that the tower will cause numerous non-Whites to visit that area. Hillbrow is an exclusively white residential area.

What is the towel called?

The J. G. Strydom microwave tower. It is called after one of our previous Prime Ministers. With the removal of the restriction on the height of buildings in the Johannesburg city area, a higher tower had to be built for the micro-way system. The hon. member himself said Hillbrow was the most densely populated area in our country. The number of telephones in relation to the area is also the largest in the country. Therefore it follows that the telephone traffic there must be very high indeed. The tower will prevent congestion in Johannesburg and on the Witwatersrand.

I want to congratulate the hon. member for Walmer on the good case made out by him in connection with the construction of the studio buildings of the S.A.B.C. in Port Elizabeth. I want to tell him that the planning of the studio buildings for Bloemfontein, Pietersburg and Port Elizabeth has reached an advanced stage, and that it is hoped to commence with the construction of these studios in the year 1971-’72. The hon. member also raised the question of installation fees in respect of ships. This matter was brought to my attention before, and it was found that the work and expenditure involved in the provision or transfer of such a service on ships, are minimal. In many cases the service is used only for a few days. In the light of this, I have decided that the old tariffs will still be applicable in the case of ships. I hope this satisfies the hon. member.

The hon. member for Umlazi spoke about call boxes. As I said to the hon. member for Urmbilo earlier this afternoon, we are doing everything in our power to provide public call boxes in areas where private telephones are not available as yet. The hon. member also asked for telephone services in Bantu townships, and for more call boxes to be provided in those townships. The demand for private telephone services in Bantu townships still is very small and consequently it is not possible to plan on a fixed basis the large-scale provision of services in those townships. Call boxes are, in fact, provided where practicable and justified by demand. I can assure the hon. member that the telephone requirements of non-white townships are not being neglected, but will enjoy attention as required by circumstances.

The hon. member for Maitland spoke about the provision of telephones to Bothasig. At present it is not possible to provide Bothasig with sufficient telephones, mainly as a result of the fact that cable leads are not available. It is expected that Bothasig will be provided with a new automatic exchange with 2,164 lines during 1972-’73. It is planned to make sufficient cable leads available at the same time.

The hon. member asked me whether I was not of the opinion that separate development was a party political matter. The hon. member ought to know, however, that in all elections since 1948 the Government has been given a mandate to proceed with the implementation of the policy of separate development. There it is Government policy. It was set on a certain course and we are proceeding on that course. I think it should be regarded as Government policy. I think what is discussed here are more problems of implementation. No special propaganda is being made for separate development. I listened to such a programme only last night. I think what was said by some gentlemen there cannot, in fact, be regarded as being very strongly in favour of the policy of separate development. About what is the hon. member raising a matter like this?

The one of this morn ing.

What was that?

It was in the morning.

At what time?

AT 25 minutes to eight.

At 25 minutes to eight. “Yesterday in Parliament” is broadcast.

You are taking chances now.

[Inaudible.]

No, I do not listen to the programme the hon. member is mentioning now. The hon. member will realize that I cannot listen to all radio programmes.

I do not hold that against you.

I just want to ask the hon. member why he is acting to piously in connection with this matter? Why are hon. members on the opposite side acting so piously?

Because you are so pious.

It is so that during the war years, in the forties, there also was a fundamental difference of opinion about the war effort among the population of South Africa. At that time the radio was fully utilized in support of the war effort. At that time it was Government policy. There were never any dangers here in South Africa about which the hair of the hon. members need have stood on end.

It was a matter of principle in a time of war.

Yes, precisely, It was Government policy despite the fact that the people were divided about the matter. We never objected to the fact that the radio was being used in that way. I cannot see any reason at all for the hon. gentleman to act so piously now.

In connection with the introduction of a television service, the hon. member for Port Natal asked why, if we feared the manpower situation, we did not have it done by private initiative. It was the hon. member for Orange Grove who said in this House that it was the declared policy of the United (Party that it should be a State-controlled television service. Now I want to ask the hon. member for Orange Grove to be so kind as to explain to the hon. member for Port Natal the policy of his party in respect of this matter. Then that hon. member will not come to me with nonsense.

You said because we were short of labour. I then told you …

The hon. member may twist the matter as he likes. The fact of the matter is that that hon. member will welcome the introduction of a television service by private initiative.

I may just tell the hon. member for Harrismith that before the end of a month pressure of work is usually experienced, and that staff members necessarily have to sacrifice extra time in order to be able to cope with all the work. There are, however, also slack periods during the month. Usually the staff is not burdened for indefinite periods. The hon. member requested me to consider paying overtime to postmen. Where unmanned vacancies exist, reasonable overtime is allowed. Overtime rates were recently revised and increased. The remuneration which staff members receive for such service, is regarded as adequate. This also applies particularly in respect of postmen who do not have the same volume of mail to deliver in the course of a month as they do have at the end of a month. Here the rule of give and take applies.

The hon. member for Pretoria (District) made a plea for the community at Welbekend, which is now being served by the Petit exchange at which delays are being experienced, to be linked up with the exchange in Verwoerdburg. Seeing that those subscribers do not fall in the area which can be served economically by the automatic exchange concerned, such an arrangement can, unfortunately, not be made. I shall, however, go into the matter in an attempt to find a solution to the problem.

The hon. member for Germiston (District) asked that telephones should not only be supplied to industries and business undertakings, but that the applications of private individuals should also enjoy special consideration. In closed exchange areas preference must necessarily be given to essential application, such as those of doctors and persons who require telephones in the interests of their livelihood. Likewise, people who require a telephone on essential medical grounds, are given preference. Precautionary measures exist to ensure that these arrangements regarding preference will not be exploited. Private individuals for whom a telephone is not as essential in such areas, must unfortunately wait. However, the hon. member may rest assured that the cases of pensioners and of the aged will be considered fully and as sympathetically as possible. For the convenience of such people, adequate provision is being made as far as possible by the provision of public call-boxes.

I think I have now replied to more or less all matters raised by hon. members.

Schedules put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Mr. Speaker, during the debate on the Second Reading of this measure, we on this side of the House indicated that this was a measure which we felt was not urgent. In fact, it does not deal to any extent, except for one clause, with matters which are relevant to the establishment of the registry under another measure which we discussed, the registry which forms the basis of the issue of the book of life. We on this side of the House also thought that it was necessary that the public and organizations generally should have an opportunity to comment on some of the clauses of this Bill. It was for that reason that we moved that the Bill be referred to a select committee before its Second Reading. That motion was rejected and the Bill proceeded to the stage where we now have the Third Reading. The wisdom of the request that we made that there should be a greater opportunity for study of this measure by outside bodies, is becoming more and more apparent every day. It is unfortunate that the hon. the Minister has proceeded and continues to proceed with haste in presenting this Bill for adoption by this House. Telegrams are arriving from organizations vitally concerned with certain aspects of this Bill. They have not had the opportunity to make representations to the hon. the Minister. We have to-day the position where we have before us a Bill for Third Reading which we on this side of the House will oppose. We will oppose it for several cogent reasons which I can perhaps put into five categories.

Apart from the fact that the public in general have not had sufficient time to react to the contents of the Bill, the first reason is that it contains another instance of the growing division of responsibility for certain aspects of our national life within the Government and within the Cabinet. In other words, there is a division of the responsibility for the control of marriages and the regulations pertaining to marriages into two ministries, namely the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Bantu Administration and Development. There seems to be an irresistible urge on the part of this Government to carve up everything that is related to the conduct of the affairs of this country into small compartments instead of leaving them under one central control and one central ministry.

The second reason why we will not support this Bill is that, as we have pointed out to the hon. the Minister, he is now introducing into the wording of this Act an expression which has no legal definition or statutory definition, namely the expression “population group”. He has introduced a new concept into the subdividing of our population by the use of the expression “population group”. In that way he also takes unto himself the power to give directions ad hoc as to how marriages should be regulated and controlled. Those regulations and controlling measures may differ from population group to population group.

I come now to our third reason. Here again the fears which I expressed to the House in regard to the effect of the clause dealing with religious ceremonies should be borne in mind as it is now becoming more and more apparent that I was justified in what I said. I have had representations from members of various churches who are becoming worried now that they have come to realize that this law means that the exact words of the Bill must be used and that they cannot be embroidered to the same intent and purpose within the language normally used in a marriage ceremony. There are many ways of expressing a simple fact, a simple agreement or a simple statement that there is no objection to a contract being entered into. People will choose by custom, by their language and by their method of expressing themselves, different ways of expressing the identical concept. That is now taken from the churches and in the marriage ceremony the churches will express this declaration, namely that there is no reason why the marriage should not be entered into, in the exact words laid down in this Bill. There are many reasons why that should be reconsidered.

I come now to my fourth point. I want to deal with the clause in this Bill which was left to a free vote. That was a wise step and we on this side accepted the hon. the Minister’s suggestion that there should be a free vote on this clause which provides for the reduction of the age of a girl from 16 to 15 requiring the Minister’s consent to marry. During the debate one realized that this was a matter which required a considerable amount of research. There are many of us on this side who hesitate to express our view on matters of social concern, matters on which we are not competent to express views. We can seek guidance and this is a case where we felt that the House should seek such guidance. In this Bill is a clause which is of great social significance for this country. It is one which can have a chain reaction in other directions of thinking in this country. This clause has not been passed by a clear majority of the members in this House and it does not carry the approval of the majority of the members of this House. I should like to remind hon. members that in the debate on this clause only 69 members of this House signified their support of it. I think it is important that we should realize that that is so. This vital issue has been of such a nature that a large number of members did not cast their votes. I do not believe that hon. members were indifferent because I do not believe that hon. members are indifferent towards a matter of this nature. I believe that hon. members, being honest with themselves in this free vote, were really unable upon the facts and information before them, to commit themselves beyond the extent of the few who voted for this particular measure.

Less than half.

I believe this is a very significant thing. As the hon. member for Pinetown says, less than half of the members of this House supported this measure. I have received a telegram from a certain organization, a women’s organization, urging me to ask the hon. the Minister to revoke his decision to agree to 15-year-olds being allowed to marry and that we should rather work towards raising the age of marriage in view of the growing number of broken marriages. This measure is before us at a time when there is an investigation into the high incidence of divorces in this country. I believe that it will be unfortunate if we agree to the third reading of this Bill this afternoon seeing that this Bill contains this provision which is of such vital concern to the people of South Africa. For these reasons we will oppose the Third Reading of this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, to-day we have once again had the very objections we have been debating for the past few days. The hon. member for Green Point commenced his speech by saying that we were introducing division into this matter and that we dividing powers between two Ministers, meaning that we were embodying in this Bill a practice which, administratively, has been in existence for many years i.e. that the Department of Bantu Administration dealt with Bantu marriages, and that we were transferring this power to that department. I cannot appreciate this objection. This is a practice which works very well; it is one which is practical, because the Department of the Interior was, in fact, charged with a responsibility which was out of our hands administratively and which had been transferred to the Department of Bantu Administration. Now the responsibility is being placed squarely on the shoulders of the Department of Bantu Administration, and therefore it is in complete agreement with actual practice.

The other objection was in connection with the marriage formula. There need not be any doubt in this regard. With this provision we are not interfering in the religious or ecclesiastical practices in any way. I want to repeat this. The churches will still have the right to use their own formula, but as representatives of the State they will use these prescribed words. They are marriage officers. We appoint them as marriage officers, so that marriage contracts, the most important contract which can be entered into between two people, may be solemnized in a way which leaves no doubt. It is all very well to say that most of us belong to the recognized big churches, whether Afrikaans or English, with a high standard of order. But surely this does not apply to all the churches in the country. There are churches which, unfortunately, come and go, people who do not have a very disciplined pattern of order. This gives rise to the fact that some of those marriages may be declared null and void. Can the hon. member imagine what embarrassment it will cause to a couple if some day, after they have brought children into the world, they were to hear that their marriage was null and void because of an error in the marriage formula as a result of which that formula did not satisfy the requirements of the law. That is why this provision is being inserted here, one with which the churches must comply, and which they must use to supplement their own practices. I trust they will continue to follow their own practices.

We have again had the objection in connection with Ministerial consent which is no longer required in the case of 15-year-olds. I want to emphasize that we are not lowering the age of marriage by this measure. The only thing that is envisaged here, is that the Minister need no longer consent to the marriage of 15-year-olds, but the parents still have to give their consent. If parents refuse to give their consent, no marriage can take place. Then that marriage, no matter how deserving or pitiable, cannot take place. That parental consent is still required. It is not being affected by this measure. This measure places the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the parents. It is a good thing for parents in this country to fulfil their responsibility towards their children. If they feel as strongly about this matter as they should, they will fulfil their responsibility in such a way that there is no reason for anxiety.

The Bill before us is designed to close certain loopholes in and to clarify certain administrative procedures under the Rents Act. Under Clause I would like to have seen certain other definitions amended and two new definitions added, but in terms of the Rules those definitions cannot be properly moved by way of amendments to this Bill. However, I would like to put them to the hon. the Minister. The first one is concerned with this clause and the two others with other clauses. There is an existing definition dealing with the widow of a lessee of premises. The widow of a lessee who dies is covered, but if the wife, living in a flat with her husband, is deserted or is divorced by her husband she has no protection from eviction because she is not the lessee. In other words, a wife who is left, through the death of her husband, to care for herself may take over and remain in the premises which she occupies.

Order! The hon. member must confine himself to the amendments: he cannot discuss the provisions of the principal Act.

As I have said, Sir, these amendments cannot be moved, but this one links up with clause 3 which we are to deal with later.

Only clause I is under consideration now.

I think I have made my point and I hope that the hon. the Minister can give us an assurance that if possible he will deal with this on a later occasion.

The hon. member has raised a very good point. I can give him the assurance that I will go into the whole matter thoroughly to see whether something can be done about it. I do not know whether it can be done this Session, but certainly next session we will be willing to meet his demands. I think they are quite fair.

I welcome any attempt made to deal with this vexed question of determining a value.

Order! The hon. member must confine himself to the amendment.

Yes, Sir. The hon. the Minister has brought into a different form a provision which was in the Act before. The provision before provided that in determining such rent the Rent Board shall have due regard to rents charged in the vicinity of premises of a similar class, nature or situation. That proviso dealt with the determination of rent. Now the Minister has provided that instead of the existing proviso, a factor should be taken into account in determining value. The emphasis is rather different from what it was before. The Minister himself in his Second Reading speech referred to the four considerations which must at present be taken into account, that is the actual building costs, if they are available; secondly, the municipal or divisional council valuation; thirdly, any sworn appraisement or valuation by a building society and, fourthly, the purpose for which the property is to be used, and now the fifth consideration, instead of its being a proviso, is now a consideration, namely the rent value of controlled premises of a similar class, nature or situation in the vicinity. Why I rise on this clause is to say to the Minister that the practical difficulty we have with rent boards is that perhaps not intentionally but in practice they arrive at a rental and then work backwards to set the valuation. I am afraid that is done because of the fact that they must take into account rentals of a similar property in a similar area.

The other problem I have is that to make this effective the Minister should perhaps see to it that the control board gives some directive as to what is really meant by premises of a similar class, nature or situation in the vicinity. A five-roomed flat in a street may be of a similar class or nature, because it is a five-roomed flat, but there can be considerable differences as to the layout of the flat, the method of completion, the fittings, etc. It is one of the problems which I realize the Minister is trying to meet in regard to the practical application of this Act by the Rent Board, but I hope that the Rent Control Board will be able to issue some sort of directive so as to make this amendment effective and applicable in the same manner throughout the urban areas. I trust that the Minister will be able to take steps of that nature.

I do not know what steps I can take. This is of course the most difficult thing. As long as we have rent control we must have rent boards. I think this is the nearest we can come to controlling the position. I agree with the hon. member for Green Point that these rent boards sometimes do things which cannot be justified. I had a complaint not long ago from Durban where a man gets a return on his block of flats, a return on the ground of something like 1 per cent after a Rent Board decision, and a return on the building of less than 2 per cent. Obviously I cannot interfere either with the Rent Board or with the Rent Control Board.

My difficulty ever since I took this job has been that we have this human factor that certain people on the Rent Control Board or on the Rent Board think their only duty is to protect the tenant while others think their only duty is to protect the landlord. I called them together earlier this year and my officials and I had a long discussion with all these permanent rent boards—I did not do it with the temporary rent boards—to try to explain to them that they have the job of a Judge, firstly, of protecting the interest of the tenants, and secondly, to see that the investor gets a fair return on his money. If the hon. member for Green Point has any suggestions to improve the position, I will be glad to listen to him, and if necessary, I will then move an amendment in the Other Place.

I think the problem is more administrative than statutory. What I have in mind is to what extent the Rent Board, in determining a value and taking into account this addition, will find itself in the position where there are two blocks of flats in the same area, with the same view, both facing the sea, etc. One block was built 10 or 12 years after the first one. There will obviously be a difference in the capital investment of the owners of those two respective blocks. If you apply this test of the rent value of controlled premises of a similar class, the Rent Board may tend, although the one man has invested far more than the other and there is the difference of 10 years in regard to construction costs, to over-emphasize this rental value instead of consideration (a) in determining the value, namely the actual cost of construction. I appreciate that the Minister cannot take it further now, but I wanted to draw his attention to it and if we can make suggestions of an administrative nature, we shall do it.

Yes, but do not ask me to take this out of the clause.

No. I am just pointing out that when one adds an additional consideration in determining value, one appears to create an additional problem.

I would like to say a few words as regards the rental of flats. In the past four years the rental of the block of flats I am staying in has been increased four times in spite of the fact that objections were raised by the tenants from time to time. I know of flats the rental of which is at present R20 to R50 more than it was four years ago. And something the tenants are very upset about, is that the owners do not carry out any improvements. If a window-pane is broken, it remains broken; the owner simply says that the tenant broke it and that the tenant has to replace it himself. The other day there was trouble because a window-pane was damaged by a golf ball from the Metropolitan, but this was replaced in the end. These flats are supposed to be furnished, but the furniture is very shabby.

Order! I just want to point out to the hon. member that we are dealing with limited amendments in the clause.

Allow me just to say that many of the tenants are now buying a good quality furniture themselves, but when the Rent Board comes to inspect and sees the good quality furniture there, it bases the rental on the good quality furniture and not on the shabby furniture which belongs to the flat.

I do not think that is quite the position, after all. It may well be the position if those tenants do not care very much, but they may at any time give evidence before the Board and say that it is not a furnished flat and that all there is, is those few pieces of old furniture, but that the rest of the furniture belongs to the tenant. The point made by the hon. member for Colesberg simply boils down to the fact that in cases where rent control is applicable one should merely leave the matter in the hands of the Rent Boards. If you are not satisfied with the decision of the Rent Board, you may appeal to the Rent Control Board in Pretoria, in which many prominent people are serving who have a knowledge of these problems. In that way one is able to lodge an appeal, and for that reason there is no right of appeal to the Minister. I do not think anybody in this House will want to see that there is a right of appeal to the Minister. I am afraid the hon. member will therefore have to submit his objections to the Rent Board as far as his case is concerned. If he does not get satisfaction from them he will have to appeal to the Rent Control Board.

Mr. Chairman, during the Second-Reading debate I asked the hon. the Minister whether this clause would in fact achieve the object it sets out to achieve, namely to enable the owner of a building to recover rate increases from the time that those rates are announced. At the time this was queried, particularly by the hon. member for Brakpan, Who said that the situation which I have sketched was not possible. I have here two notices from an estate agency company, addressed to tenants of flats. They read as follows:

This notice is dated 26th June, 1970, and it replaces one dated 10th June, 1970. These give notice of an anticipated increase which was not to take effect until the 1st August, 1970. That increase has not yet been announced. The 1st August has now passed, but the amount of the increase will not be determined, and the landlord will not know what it is, possibly for another month or more. The increase in rates will take effect from 1st August, but the Budget has not yet been introduced and the determination of increases has not yet been made known to landlords. When these increases are fixed, they will, however, be payable as from the 1st August, 1970. This clause as it stands will, I submit, not cover this situation. This clause will only cover notice given after the announcement by the local authority. The local authority cannot announce the increase until the Budget has been introduced and until the fixed increase has been allocated to various buildings and the globular sum has been broken down into amounts for individual flats.

But do they ever make it retrospective?

That is the object of the notice I have mentioned. The notice states:

To my mind, incidentally, that is quite a ridiculous share they have suggested, because in the case of the same block of flats the estimate which was made three weeks before the notice I have just quoted was 50 cents. The owners then withdrew the notice that the increase would be 50 cents and notified the tenants that the increase would be R2.00.

Were the rates actually increased on the 1st August?

We do not know yet, but when the rates are increased, the effective date will be the 1st August. This announcement speculates on the strength of press reports, that there will be an increase of 15 per cent. This has been refuted by the Chairman of Finance of the Durban City Council, who has given a different figure of approximately 8 per cent. At this stage, this is all based on speculation in the press, but when the Budget is introduced the increase will become effective from the 1st August. That is the problem. I am afraid that the hon. the Minister is going to find that this amendment will not cover this particular situation. I do not know how this will work in other cities, but I can speak for Durban. I would suggest that the matter perhaps be investigated more thoroughly. It may be necessary to grant permission to give warning in advance of the actual announcement of the increase, because I accept, and I think this Committee will accept, that an owner should not have to carry for a long period increases in rates which he cannot pass on to the tenants. In fact, he should be able to pass them on from the date of increase. That is the object of this amendment, but I do not think that it is going to meet the position especially in Durban, where, increases are made retrospective by the local authority.

Mr. Chairman, if I may just add to what has been said by the hon. member for Durban (Point), the position in Cape Town is that the rates are fixed for the year from the 1st January to the 31st December. There may well be an announcement by the City Council, when presenting its Budget towards the end of the preceding year, or early in the new year that there is to be a rates increase of a certain amount, but the property owner is not aware of the exact amount of the additional rates until he receives his rates account. Those rates accounts are rendered in February or March, and by that time almost a quarter of the year for which those rates are payable has elapsed. It is a difficult problem, because one has to see to it that landlords are not the losers, as they are now. They can lose up to 25 per cent on their increased rates because of the late notification of the amounts involved and the late authorization of the increase. At the same time one has to be certain that the tenant is not going to be loaded with a considerable sum of money to be paid in one particular month. I wonder whether this is not a matter to which further consideration should be given. It has been suggested by the hon. member for Durban (Point) that an indication, a warning notice as it were, be given to the tenant whose rent is going to be increased. I personally see no objection to going even further and allowing the landlord to give an estimate of the increased rentals, based on the expected increase in rates. These increases should only become payable when the board finally decides on the exact amount. What I am getting at is that the tenant should be warned that there is likely to be an increase of rental due to an increase in rates.

That will of course have no legal effect whatsoever.

Yes, but I am merely saying that, in terms of the clause as it stands, the difficulty which the hon. the Minister will have is that the notice can only be given, as the hon. member for Durban (Point) has indicated, after the date of publication of the increase in rates by the local authority. Now when is that date? A landlord may find in a newspaper that the City Council has discussed the matter and that the rates are likely to be increased. I think it should then be an obligation upon the landlord to warn the tenant of what is likely to happen, so that the tenant can make provision for the provision of the necessary sum. This is again one of those practical problems one finds in the application of this Act. At the moment these provisions are not benefiting the owners and if these increases are made retrospective, a heavy burden is going to be placed on the tenant as well, unless he has been warned timeously of what to expect.

Mr. Chairman, may I point out that this clause, as moved, will go a long way to strengthen the position of the lessor who does not have a lease in so far as the recovery of rates is concerned. I think, however, that the clause does not only make provision for the situation which may arise when the rates are increased. That is what hon. members have in mind, but they should take into account the revaluation of properties. As hon. members know, in this connection it is laid down in terms of provincial ordinances for valuations to be revised every five years. In the Transvaal it is every three years. Furthermore, each of those ordinances contains—or should contain—a provision entitling all interested parties to object to an increased valuation. In other words and according to my interpretation a tenant, as an interested party, will be entitled to object to an increased valuation as a result of which he will eventually have to pay an increased rent calculated on a pro rata basis. In addition to the notice a tenant may be given under the proposed clause, there will in any event be ample time for him to lodge objections in the municipal valuation court to such an increased valuation. I think that this clause will actually cover the majority of cases. The solitary case which will not be covered by this clause may perhaps be protected under a lease. I appreciate the problem hon. members on that side have in this connection, but, as I have said, the majority of cases are covered by the fact that these increases in rates follow upon periodical revaluations.

Mr. Chairman, this clause is there merely to protect the investor. He can claim from the tenant the exact amount of the increase in rents. As I understood the speech of the hon. member for Durban (Point) during the Second Reading, his main difficulty was that the tenant may be saddled with paying two or three months extra rent. That can happen.

The landlord will not be able to recover the amount in terms of this amendment.

I think he can. I do not know much about legal matters but I have discussed this point very thoroughly with my Department and they assure me that he can. If the hon. member is not satisfied with what I have just said, he had better draft an amendment and then we can see what we can do about it. The difficulty is this. My Department agrees that there can be cases where the tenant will have to pay rent for two or three months but they do not think it likely. I should like to suggest that hon. members accept this clause as it is so that we can see how it works in practice.

*The hon. member for Bloemfontein (West) thinks that this will work in practice, except in most exceptional cases and which he thinks are covered by a contract. Since those hon. members do not have an amendment to this clause, I think I must accept that the investor is being protected here. I quite agree that a tenant may find himself in grave trouble when we find in practice that he has to pay three or four month’s additional rent. This is very likely, but I was assured that in view of the various ordinances of the various provinces it is most unlikely for something like this to happen. I therefore assure the hon. member that we will watch the position. If there are any malpractices, we will simply have to rectify the provision.

Mr. Chairman, this is the important clause in this Bill. It is what I call “the intimidation clause”. It is there to try to prevent some of the malpractices and evasions which have taken place and, in particular, the intimidation of tenants in order to persuade them to vacate premises which the owner wishes to convert for other purposes. I want to point out to the hon. the Minister that since the Second Reading debate I have had two more instances of this in the one building which I mentioned, namely Kangelani. In regard to the one case I should like to say that only this afternoon I received a telegram which stated: “Received summons yesterday and must see magistrate to-morrow re eviction”. This was the one case which I quoted and which I understood had been settled. The person concerned had posted the rent when going overseas, but the rent was returned and when she returned home there was an eviction order pinned to her door. The other case also concerns a person who had been overseas. While this person was overseas, a relative who was seriously ill came to Durban. The relative’s wife borrowed the key from the daughter of the lessee who allowed the wife of the sick person to spend two nights in the tenant’s flat, whilst the husband was in hospital and the lessee was overseas. That person has also now received a lawyer’s letter notifying her that he is taking action for eviction because she allowed a person other than the lessee to stay on the premises.

Is that not a case of breach of contract?

Yes, but I want to indicate the extent to which an owner is prepared to go to find any sort of loophole by means of which he can evict a person from a building. This clause goes a long way towards preventing some of these evils. But here we have a case where the owner of a building is prepared, ruthlessly and without regard to any other considerations, to exploit every legal loophole in order to get rid of people. I might say that since I mentioned the name Kangelanie in the Second Reading debate I have had three letters saying that the water has been cut off.

In terms of this clause they will not be able to do that.

This clause will deal with that. The water has been cut off “by accident”. Here I should like to quote from one letter, which states: “It may just be coincidental with your speech, but we have been without hot water over the week-end. A new innovation has now been introduced, namely that the corridor lights are switched off at nine o’clock.” The water and the lights can be covered by clause 3, but I mention these two cases of eviction to indicate that we will not have closed the door completely. I feel that two further steps will be necessary. One will have to deal with the method used to push up rentals.

Order! The hon. member must confine himself to the clause.

Mr. Chairman, this clause deals with certain evils and I am submitting that it does not cover all the evils.

Order! I am afraid the hon. member may not discuss them.

Mr. Chairman, then I will not do so. I will content myself with saying that I put to the hon. the Minister and to his Department proposals to deal with some of the problems not covered by this clause and that I hope that the hon. the Minister will at the earliest possible opportunity, perhaps through the General Laws Amendment Bill, cover the loopholes which are left in regard to the supply of food which is not covered by this clause.

Finally, I should like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to instruct his Department to use this clause wherever it may appear necessary to do so. We sometimes have measures on the Statute Book designed to prevent an evil, but they are not applied. I refer to the provision in respect of empty flats. I appeal to the hon. the Minister to use this power that is being taken now to deal with any case which is brought to the notice of the Department and where there is clearly victimization and intimidation taking place. It is no use passing this clause if it is simply going to be a dead letter on the Statute Book. I hope the hon. the Minister will give the assurance that this is in fact teeth with which he intends biting and not merely barking.

Mr. Chairman, the first two cases mentioned by the hon. member are quite clearly cases of breach of agreement. I cannot see how we can legislate for that. There must be a duty resting not only on the investor or the landlord, but also on the tenant as far as adhering to that contract is concerned. I cannot see how we can interfere. If a contract is broken and the one party can prove before a court that the contract has been broken, I do not think the other party has a chance and I do not see how we can deal with the matter.

The hon. member discussed the other three points fully with me. I can tell him now that in principle I agree with all three of them. As I said earlier, I give him the undertaking that I will do something about them this Session if at all possible and, if not, then next session. I think this covers all forms of intimidation. He may not switch off the light at 9 o’clock or at any other time, if it is necessary to have one there. The new section 21 (4) reads as follows—

I think the hon. member and his legal friends will agree with me that this provision is very wide indeed. As far as putting this clause into operation is concerned, my Department certainly cannot do so. The hon. member says that this clause must be like a set of teeth, and that we must now bite and not only bark. Obviously, if anything like this happens, all the lessee has to do is to report it to the police. It will be an offence and the lessor will be liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding R200, which I think is quite high. My Department cannot administer the provisions of this clause because it is the job of the Police. We will, however, do everything in our power to see to it that any mischief by landlords in this regard are excluded as far as possible.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to seek the hon. the Minister’s guidance on a further point arising from this clause. Quite recently a case was brought to my notice in Johannesburg where the lessor of a building induced the tenants to accept notice to quit on the grounds that it was intended to demolish the building. He informed them that he proposed to go ahead with the demolition of the building; and he then put it to the tenants that if they would vacate the premises within three months from the date of notice, he would allow them to remain rent-free in their apartments for the remaining three months. I have not approached the Minister, but I have already spoken to members of his Department about this matter. These tenants were led to believe, by the letter which was sent to them, that the building would in fact be demolished although it transpired that the lessor had not yet obtained a demolition order. Nevertheless he wilfully led them to believe that the building would be demolished and in this way he obtained from them their consent to leave the building within three months. Armed with this consent, I understand, he proposes to approach the Department for a demolition order. The clause now under consideration provides that a lessor may not induce tenants to vacate a dwelling by threatening them, by being a nuisance to them or by suspending services, services to which the lessee is entitled. But here is another situation which I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister, namely, that by “wilfully misleading” them he might induce them to leave the building. This is the fourth case which does not seem to be covered fully by the three provisions of this clause. I think it is perhaps stretching the meaning of words to say that it falls under the first provision namely a threat. He has not actually threatened them, but has in fact wilfully misled them and has induced these unfortunate people to accept his request to vacate the building within three months. Armed with these consents he is hopeful now of getting a demolition order.

Mr. Chairman, the position is simply that a threat like that in order to get a demolition order is of no value whatsoever. The tenant need not take any notice of such a threat at all. No building can be demolished without my permission. I will certainly not take any notice whatsoever of tenants given an assurance that they are quite satisfied that this building can be demolished. I must be satisfied first. Before a building is demolished, I must be satisfied that there is alternative accommodation at more or less the same rental. It is only in those circumstances that I will give permission for a building to be demolished. I am not able to discuss it, but in terms of a Bill which I intend introducing later in this Session, I will ask this House for power to determine whether a building can be demolished or whether it cannot be demolished. At the moment I have no power to stipulate the conditions under which a building can be demolished. In the Bill which I intend introducing later, I shall ask for that power. I have already discussed this matter with the hon. member for Durban (Point). I will then be in a position to give (permission for a building to be demolished within a certain period of time provided that the necessary alternative accommodation is provided for the tenants.