Mr. Speaker, I move—

That the Bill be now read a Third Time.

Agreed to (Mrs. H. Suzman dissenting). Bill read a Third Time.

In the short time which was available last night, the hon. member for Rosettenville touched upon two matters, and in my opinion it would help the discussion on both sides if I replied to those two matters provisionally.

The first matter which the hon. member raised was in connection with the search for oil. I have here a report to date in regard to the activities of Soekor, which I should like to read to this House and the hon. member.

†On the 30th April, 1970, Soekor had completed its first five years of operations. I think that taking into account the difficulties experienced in the search for oil all over the world, it has been a very successful five years for Soekor and for South Africa. With the oil geological knowledge gained in its prospecting programmes on land during this period, Soekor is at this stage engaged in dividing the areas which justify investigation into the more promising and less promising areas with respect to oil possibilities, with the result that Soekor can now concentrate on those areas which are more promising. The continental shelf was divided into blocks and all of the blocks were sub-leased. Investigations continue intensely. Two of these blocks have since been relinquished to Soekor in their entirety. Hon. members will know that after a certain period, according to the leases, a part of the block or the total block has to revert back to Soekor. In this respect I may also say that as these blocks or parts of them revert back to Soekor, Soekor, as the result of the reasonably promising results, will be in a better position to negotiate new leases which will take effect as soon as these areas revert back to Soekor.

In the five years of its existence Soekor completed approximately 35,000 square kilometres of gravimetric surveys, 340,000 square kilometres of aeromagnetic surveys, 394,000 square kilometres of photogeological surveys, 10,300 line kilometres of seismic surveys and 6 core boreholes, and, added to this, 11 cutting boreholes, in some of which signs of oil and gas were found, but which are being reported as dry. Soekor has spent approximately R24 million up to the end of June, 1970. This is made UD as follows: Administration, R2,349,706, or 10 per cent of the total; geology, R1,316,581, or 5 per cent of the total; geophysics, R7,553,179, or 32 per cent of the total; and on drilling, R11,356,064, which is 48 per cent of the total. Other exploration expenses are R1,256,616, or 5 per cent of the total. This gives a total of R23,832,146.

Sublessees, including amongst others the most important oil companies in the world, were invited to undertake the prospecting for oil in the sea areas of the Republic of South Africa. In the 36 months up to 30th June, 1970, these sublessees spent approximately R12 million—and this is rather important— which exceeds their contractual commitments for this period by approximately R8 million. Approximately R4.5 million was spent on seismic surveys and interpretation and R7.5 million on drilling. One of these companies has already completed four boreholes in its prospecting block south of Plettenberg Bay. That is the Superior Oil Company. Gas with condensate was discovered in the first and third of these boreholes. As hon. members will remember, I made the announcement of the first discovery in the House some 15 months ago. The first borehole—that is the one I am referring to—also qualified for granting of a tax concession for the first discoverer of gas to this company. This borehole has been sealed and is sealed at the moment, for the reason that it is the only find so far. It is rather deep into the sea with very rough seas and I think I am right in saying that if this borehole was on land it would already have been in production.

The same sea-drilling rig which completed the last three of these boreholes is presently drilling a borehole for another company in its prospecting block south of Mossel Bay, in which area Soekor has recently negotiated a 10 per cent minority interest. The name of this rig is the Ocean Traveller. The rest of the sublessees have mainly undertaken seismic surveys and four of these companies have reached the stage where drilling can be undertaken as soon as a suitable rig can be obtained. Hon. members will realize that obtaining a suitable rig is a very difficult matter indeed. These rigs are not readily available and they are not really built for the deep waters and the rough seas of our coast.

Soekor has also obtained a 12 per cent interest in an area north-east of Durban, and together with Rand Mines it has obtained an interest in the 5-mile sea strip between Still Bay and Plettenberg Bay, where drilling of the first borehole near Mossel Bay will commence towards the second half of this month. The name of this rig is the Transworld 61. This is the rig which was damaged as the result of rough seas. May I also, in passing, inform hon. members that we have taken certain steps to supply these people with better weather information and I am sure that this will also be of help there in the sea search for oil. The repairs of this Transworld 61 can all be done in South Africa, which I think is also a very great feat for us because it is the first time ever that this sort of thing has happened in our coastal waters.

At the end of this month the first 25 per cent of the sea areas which have to be compulsorily relinquished, reverts back to Soekor. These are the areas that I referred to earlier in my announcement. The Geological Survey has undertaken considerable supporting work in the search for oil. At present this supporting work consists mainly of core drilling, which has been carried out by the Department of Water Affairs. May I lastly add that the whole question of whether Soekor should participate with these larger companies as a matter of principle on a minority or an equal basis, is under discussion at the moment. Soekor has obtained these two participations of 10 per cent and 12 per cent that I referred to recently out of funds which were savings, and that was only decided on on an ad hoc basis. The whole principle of whether they should continue and seek more participation is under consideration at the moment by the Cabinet. If hon. members so wish, they can give me their views on this, which might be helpful in coming to a final decision.

*The hon. member raised another matter, and that is the question of Bantu in the mining industry, especially in the homelands. I should like to help the hon. member as well as this House in this regard, because you will appreciate, Sir, that this is a very important matter.

The Government has irrevocably committed itself to the gradual and orderly development of the Bantu homelands to eventual full independence. It flows logically from this that the Government will also make it possible for the Bantu to prepare themselves systematically in all spheres of life in the homelands including mining, for that independence. In regard to the Government’s approach in principle in connection with Bantu workers in the mines in the Bantu homelands, the principle of the position is exactly the same as in the case of the Public Service and any other kind of work within the Bantu homelands. My colleague the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration also made it very clear on his Vote that, as far as the Bantu homelands were concerned, no ceiling at all will eventually be placed on the Bantu in connection with any work, including mining. Therefore I think that as far as this principle is concerned, no one has any doubt; the Government has no doubt and the Opposition or any other body has no reason to have any doubt. There can be no doubt in regard to the Government’s approach in principle.

Now I must unfortunately rectify something in this regard which appeared in the Rand Daily Mail on 26th August. It was a report on the front page: “Bantustan Mine Curb on Blacks”, and it read—

White union is believed to be behind decision. This is the sort of report one has to deal with in South Africa these days. So much is being said nowadays about credibility. This article appeared under the name of the person, “by Alan Paine, Mining Editor”. This is not a speculation; it is not something he heard. He said the following—

“The Cabinet has ruled”. This is an absolute statement of fact, while the Cabinet has taken no decision whatsoever on that as yet. In fact, I said in a statement—and I do not do this often, but I do not want any unrest about this matter—that at that stage the Cabinet had not had any discussions about this matter at all since I became Minister of Mining, and this is 34 years already. But this newspaper wrote on its front page: “The Cabinet has ruled,” and it continued—

As if the “decision” was an accomplished fact. I wonder what has happened to credibility if one gets this sort of thing. I am mentioning this merely to show that, in the light of what I said in the statement and in the light of the facts, this report is completely untrue. There is no truth in it.

To come back to this matter, I should like to say that in view of this necessity for training the Bantu, express provision was made in the Mining Rights Act of 1967 for the Bantu to obtain and exercise mining rights in the homelands. In addition, provision was made in the Mines and Works Act of 1956 that under certain circumstances Bantu may perform work in mines in Bantu areas which is normally reserved for scheduled persons (i.e. persons other than Bantu). The question arises as to the way in which Bantu should be trained in the homeland mines in order to be able to use those powers properly. The crux of the requirements of the Mines and Works Act is that control of the physical branches of mining can be placed only in the hands of persons who have been fully qualified by training to supervise the security and health of the mine and its workers with authority. In the past two years I have had several interviews in connection with the matter and representations were made to my department in this regard by several bodies. In fact, as is known, my most recent interview took place at my invitation on Tuesday, 8th September, with representatives of the Mineworkers’ Union. In the light of all the interviews and representations it is clear to me that in its action the Government will have to note that (1) the standpoint in principle, as I outlined it a moment ago, is not interfered with; (2) it will act in such a way that in the application of the Mines and Works Act in the Bantu homelands, it will not endanger the security and health of any miner or the big investment involved in the development of a mine;(1) within the framework of the above-mentioned primary obligation which rests on the Government, the Bantu is trained in his own homeland, as he is ready for it, in order to perform work to the fullest possible extent in the mining industry of the homelands; and(2) the whole matter, apart from what I have just said, still has many other facets, such as, inter alia, the position of mines which are situated partly in white areas and partly in the homelands, the position of foreign Bantu in homeland mines, and the important position of white persons who work there or who make themselves available to undertake the training in the homelands.

The details of how this can gradually be put into effect in practice, are still being discussed with the various interested parties. I think hon. members will agree with me that, in view of the fact that we are now conducting private discussions with the Mineworkers’ Union, the departments concerned here and the mining houses, it would be undesirable and certainly improper to anticipate these discussions with the various interested parties in any respect. I think it is a fair point of view which I have now put to hon. members. I hope hon. members on the other side will accept it as such.

Hon. members have the right to be dissatisfied because speedier action was not taken in this connection. Hon. members can point out that some applications were made two years ago and more. Certain of the applications were subsequently withdrawn. Let me point out, however, that we are dealing with consultations and arrangements here which will in fact be of importance generations ahead. Let me say at once that, whether there is pressure from the Press or anybody whatsoever, I will not allow myself to be diverted from the patience and the circumspection with which I am handling the whole matter. Eventually we shall gain the support of all the interested parties, as we succeeded in doing in the past. Hon. members must never forget that there is only one basis on which the Bantu can be trained in his own homeland. That is if the white mineworkers are prepared to train him with enthusiasm. Therefore I shall deal with this matter with the necessary patience and circumspection.

I now want to come back to what the hon. member for Rosettenville said. It is quite correct that we have applications before us. Although I do not want to mention the names of the mines or the details of these confidential matters, I want to say that these applications are mainly concerned with more responsible work for the Bantu in the homeland mines. The matter of the Bantu in mining can be divided into two aspects. Firstly, there is the matter of the standpoint in principle and, secondly, there are the details. I do not think there can be any doubt that I put the Government’s standpoint in principle clearly. There is no one on earth who cannot understand it. With reference to the standpoint in principle, the Opposition can help us. If they help us, it will be very useful in the discussions. I am certain that the interested parties will also be interested in this. What is the Opposition’s standpoint in principle? Yesterday evening the hon. member said to me: “You tell us your policy first, then I will tell you”. He said to me “It is your baby”. But it is the baby of all of us. I now want to discuss this matter further with the hon. member. As far as the aspect of principle is concerned, we agree on two points. The one is that the Mines and Works Act should remain applicable throughout South Africa. We have no problem in regard to that, because the hon. member also said this yesterday evening. We agree on the second point as well, namely that the Bantu can progress in mining from where he is today. I do not think we have any difficulty in that regard, because the hon. member and his party want this as well. Thirdly, we agree in principle that that progress should take place gradually from the bottom to the top and not from the top to the bottom, and that it should be based on training. In the fourth place, that progress can take place only if the Bantu are competent in all respects. In other words, the Bantu must have the knowledge, the skill and the sense of responsibility. In the fifth place, the safety and the health aspect of that specific mine must always be prominently in the foreground and be taken into account. I think we agree on that as well, and have no problem in this regard either. But subsequently the hon. member said yesterday evening that no differentiation should be made between the Bantu homeland and the rest of the country. South Africa should be treated as a unit in regard to the application of the Mines and Works Act in respect of the Bantu, the Whites and all the others. The Mines and Works Act should be applied to the whole of South Africa, “a nation of 20 million people”.

Why does the hon. the Minister say “nation” and where does he get it from?

What should I say?

A population.

Fine, then I shall say a population of 20 million. It does not matter at all. Both my colleague and I declared in principle that the Mines and Works Act. which differentiates between the Bantu in mining and makes specific provision for the Bantu in mining in the homelands, should be applied in such a way that there is a clear difference between its application in the homelands and its application in the white Republic of South Africa. This is the difference between the United Party and us. I now want to ask the hon. member whether, in the application of the Mines and Works Act, we should grant exemtions to Bantu in terms of this Act, because as a matter of principle this is the most important issue to-day as far as the miner and the mining industry is concerned. I do not think it is an unfair question. I will have to know, because I cannot evade that question. In my discussions I have already replied clearly to that, and I shall have to continue with it. The United Party does not participate in discussions; they are the alternative Opposition. In fact, the United Party can help us and be of use it they can help me, I shall welcome it Therefore I want to ask in the first place whether, in principle, we should grant exemptions to Bantu in respect of certain spheres of work under the Mines and Works Act. If so, I want to ask in the second place if we should do it for the whole country or only for the Bantu homelands. We state explicitly that we are considering it in principle for the Bantu homelands, unlike in the case of the white people. In the third place, I want to ask the hon. member whether the ceiling on the Bantu in mining should remain in South Africa. In regard to this ceiling, I stated very clearly what this side’s point of view is. If exemptions are granted in terms of the Mines and Works Act, I want to ask whether conditions are to be attached to them. I should like to know this from the hon. member, because it could help me. In particular, I want to know what type of exemption and what sort of conditions we should lay down. Let me make it still easier for the hon. member. One cannot ever discuss hypothetical cases with the Mine-workers’ Union or the mine owners; we must discuss specific cases. I have already discussed them and I am discussing them now. I want to ask the hon. member whether we should apply the Mines and Works Act in such a way that the Bantu in South Africa can become a shift boss.

†Is it or is it not the policy of the United Party to let the Bantu in South Africa become a shift boss or a mine captain or a manager or even a miner?

You are not asking for assistance; you are talking politics now.

Mr. Chairman, this is not politics. I must discuss this matter with these people at the end of the month or even sooner.

And you are interested in our point of view?

Of course. I should like to know whether I would have the support of that side of the House if I were to say, for example, that a Bantu may or may not become a miner.

You will have our consent to any agreement you can reach.

Very well. You give your consent to any agreement.

To any agreement which can be reached with the persons concerned.

But that side of the House does not want to help me to reach such an agreement.

But we cannot negotiate. You must conduct the negotiations.

Mr. Chairman, it is a perfectly simple matter. I just want to know whether the Mines and Works Act should be applied in such a way that a Bantu may also become a miner. Regulation 322 makes specific provision that it can or cannot be done. Should a Bantu be able to become a shift boss, must he be able to become a mine captain? That is what we should like to know. What is the reply of that side of the House?

The hon. member for Yeoville gave that reply a moment ago.

I want to go to these discussions and say. among other things, that I have requested the assistance of the United Party and that I received that assistance or did not.

You have received it.

No. I have not received it. I want to know whether a Bantu can become a miner in South Africa, yes or no. If that side of the House wishes to do so, they may attach conditions to it.

Can a Bantu handle explosives?

Leave the explosives aside for a moment. Can he become a miner or can he become a shift boss?

Why should we leave the explosives aside?

Hon. members may talk about that too as much as they like. This is the cardinal question. The other question is, if a Bantu can occupy any of these posts, will it apply to the whole of South Africa in terms of the United Party’s policy, or will it apply only to the Bantu homelands? These are the questions which I will have to reply to Nor am I scared to reply to them in my discussions. because I have already stated our point of view to a large extent in respect of what the discussions are really concerned with. But I think it is fair to say and I am justified in saying to a responsible Opposition that we are concerned here with an important matter and that it is fair that the mine owner and the mineworker should know what the standpoint of the Opposition is. It is very fair that they should know this. The Opposition is not conducting these discussions, but nor is it precluded from saying clearly and in detail what it wants to say. However, I am not asking for details; I am asking what the Opposition’s standpoint is in principle. We must receive a reply to that question; otherwise I shall have the right to say during those discussions that that side of the House is hiding certain matters or that they do not want to be of assistance in this matter.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the hon. the Minister has come in to the debate early. He has given us the benefit of his recent experience and has told us something about both the questions that were put to him last night. We thank him for that. He put some pertinent questions to this side of the House. I will try to answer them. Firstly, let me say that we on this side of the House will not interfere with any negotiations that take place between the miner through his union and the employer. We will not interfere with that. We will encourage peaceful negotiations. Why should negotiations be necessary? It becomes necessary in this case as far as I can see, not because there is a demand for an increase in wages. It becomes necessary because there happens to be a shortage of white manpower. A shortage of white manpower may be either in the mines in South Africa, as we know it at the moment, or it may be because of trained miners required in the homelands in the future. We say to the hon. the Minister that he must negotiate to the best of his ability. The mineworker knows what he wants. He knows what protection he requires. We on this side of the House say we will be against any chance of the white miner loosing his job because of negotiations. We will be against that. We will say that the only way the Bantu worker can advance to those positions on the mines, whether it be miner, or shift boss or mine captain, is by negotiation and by the goodwill of both parties that are concerned, i.e. the miner and the employer.

And in the homelands?

We have stated our point quite clearly yesterday in that regard. We said it will be impossible for the present to find trained Africans to do this work in the homelands. They are not yet trained.

And if they were trained?

Mr. Chairman, these people are not yet trained. They cannot do the work because they are not trained for the work. It will require white trained miners to go to the homelands to train the Bantu there. They will then be in the position to learn from the white miner. But who will take the white miner’s place that comes vacant in the present set-up when he goes to the homelands to train the Bantu there? It will require more negotiations to fill his place. The hon. the Minister shakes his head. But does the hon. the Minister really believe that there is a continual and consistent flow of white miners trained into the mining industry at the moment?

What must the Bantu be taught?

The Bantu must be taught in the homelands what is required of him because there will not be enough white miners for both areas.

Must he be taught to be a miner?

Yes, he must be taught to be a miner.

And a shift boss?

Yes. If the union says that this is what will have to be done. Hon. members must remember what we said here, namely that the Mines and Works Act will be in operation throughout South Africa. We can only do that by discussing these methods with the Mineworkers’ Union. If there is no discussion with the Mineworkers’ Union, and the Minister does it, by a stroke of the pen without negotiation, we will not be on his side. However, if he does it with negotiation, we will be on his side. He must be patient with negotiations. These are matters that cannot be discussed over the floor of the House by saying yes or not to one another. We will get nowhere along those lines. I say that if the hon. the Minister wants to do the right thing to the miner to-day, he must look after him and just make sure that he does not lose his job.

I want to leave it at that. There are other matters I want to deal with. Last year I asked the Minister if he would agree with the proposal that I made; that after 25 years a miner ought to have the option of going on pension. Some of the members on that side of the House agreed with me, but the hon. the Minister did not. I want to bring to the notice of this House what the life of a miner is like and why I have made that proposal. In the mining industry to-day the miner suffers from two hazards: poisoning by dust and the accident rate. These are the two factors that can shorten the miner’s life. Compare it with the shortest life span of people in other industries. If the hon. the Minister will look at the report of the Pneumoconiosis Commissioner, he will see on page 15, paragraph 3, that the numbers and average ages at time of death of those who were certified for the first time on or after the 1st October, 1962. The number of deaths of miners in the A category of pneumoconiosis, that is from 20 to 50 per cent, totalled 194. Their average age of death was 58 years. In the next category 26 died and their average age of death was 58 years. Pneumoconiosis above 75 per cent caused the death of 11 people at an average age of 58.5. Of those with tuberculosis as well. 20 died at an average age of 61.5 years. These figures, as they strike me, mean that, firstly, a miner’s life is a shortened life, much shorter than expected. The Minister knows that to-day the average age of death is about 70; but for the miner it has fallen to below 60. Secondly, if he does live longer, say to the age of 61 years, and he started off with pneumoconiosis early on, then after 24 years’ service we find his pneumoconiosis has progressed to such an extent that it has already become complicated with tuberculosis. This, I say, is a very serious position.

On top of that the accident rate gives us some shocking figures. In the year under review, 665 people were killed—almost two people per day. On top of that 28,606 were injured—not injuries of a minor nature but injuries which caused the worker to be off duty for 14 days or more. At this rate, 80 people are being seriously injured on the mines every day. Where we have to do with an industry in which there is such a high accident rate, with the additional hazard of poisoning through the inhalation of dust, shortening the life of the miner, I say a miner ought to have the option of getting out of the industry on a reasonable pension after 25 years’ service. It will enable him to take up some other occupation if he so wishes. [Time expired.]

It is very clear that the hon. member raised the question of Bantu mineworkers in the Bantu homelands with the object of embarrassing the Government.

Oh, no.

But now that the Minister has finished with him it is clear who has actually been embarrassed. It is necessary that when we speak about the interests of the mineworkers we should try to keep our discussion divorced from party politics, and when we are speaking about the training of non-white mineworkers we must, therefore, discuss this at a level divorced from party politics.

But I want to continue by expressing a few ideas. In the first place we must record our appreciation to Dr. Tommie Muller of General Mining for the manual of Afrikaans mining terms that he drew up. We are glad of that; this now also gives the Afrikaans speaking people on the mines their due. In the second place I want to express my thanks to the Minister for the attention he gave to my personal representations in connection with the disease scleroderma in the mines. Three cases of this disease occurred over a short period in my constituency. Perhaps the matter has already progressed so far that the Minister could take us into his confidence at this stage by telling us how matters stand at present.

Then I want to exchange a few ideas about pneumoconiosis. I have no comment to make on the opinion of the hon. member for Rosettenville that a mineworker should have the choice of retiring from the service after 25 years.

Are you opposed to that?

No, not necessarily. In any case, I shall come back to this at a later stage. I think it was two years ago that I asked the Minister to give consideration to having the Pneumoconiosis Act of 1962 investigated by a commission once more, so that the shortcomings in that Act could be put right. The hon. member for Rosettenville also mentioned this, and it is something that could be done. However, the Minister did not see his way clear to appointing such a commission at the time.

To-day I want to repeat that request of mine. The Act has already been in operation for eight years. It is true that in the meantime certain changes have been effected and certain shortcomings ironed out. Yet certain aspects remain that are not giving overall satisfaction. I am thinking here, for example, of certification standards. In the meantime an international conference was held at Johannesburg, where industrial diseases were discussed at an academic level. In the light of that, I wonder whether we should not once more place our pneumoconiosis legislation under the magnifying glass in order to see whether we cannot give better benefits to the mine-worker. In this connection there are two aspects that must be borne in mind. In the first place there appears to be confusion outside about compensation for industrial diseases. The tendency exists to confuse pneumoconiosis compensation with a pension. There is, after all, a difference between pneumoconiosis compensation and pensions.

A few years ago—I think it was in 1960— there was draft legislation before this House in which it was proposed that pneumoconiosis compensation and pensions be combined. However, that draft legislation was not acceptable to the interested parties, and it was consequently dropped. Strangely enough, a few years later the same people came forward with a so-called new approach to pneumoconiosis —the so-called Gründling approach. It had the blessing of the Chamber of Mines. The combining of pneumoconiosis compensation and pensions was included in that new approach. The principle was, therefore, accepted at a later stage by the Mineworkers’ Union, under the leadership of Mr. Gründling.

The matter was investigated at the time by the Silk Commission, but the commission did not comment on this principle. They only expressed themselves in opposition to the principle that under this new proposal the payment in respect of industrial diseases involving the mineworkers was to be left in the hands of the Chamber of Mines and the trade unions, and that the Government would be completely relieved of its responsibilities in respect of compensation for industrial diseases. On that point it could not be accepted, and we are very definitely opposed to the Government not honouring its responsibilities in respect of compensation for industrial diseases, because the Government gave its word of honour and we cannot take this responsibility away from the Government. On those grounds the Silk Commission did not accept that new approach.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not also have this point investigated if a commission is appointed, i.e. the combining and combined payment of pneumoconiosis and pension benefits. This will have certain advantages accruing to the mineworkers. Then there is a second aspect which, in my opinion, will have to be investigated, and that is the contradiction, as I see it, in the pneumoconiosis compensation for mineworkers. We find that the basis upon which the mine-worker is certified, in order to obtain pneumoconiosis benefits, is the loss of his working capacity. This is something that is very difficult to determine; something that cannot be measured absolutely. In my opinion the contradiction is this: When a person is certified in the first stage, in the category 20 per cent to 30 per cent, he is entitled to a pension, but that mineworker may still work underground and earn just as much as if he had never contracted pneumoconiosis.

In other words, his earning capacity is not affected; he still earns the same, and is actually compensated, at that stage, for something he has not really lost, because he is still earning the same amount. The idea I want to implant here is that when a commission or committee is appointed again to investigate pneumoconiosis compensation, this amount, which the person is obtaining when he does not need it, should rather be paid to him at a later stage when he really needs it. That will perhaps give overall satisfaction.

Sir, the hon. the Minister of Mines has put to the Opposition what he disarmingly calls a few very simple questions, and equally disarmingly he invited the Opposition to give him a few simple replies. Now, Sir, anyone who has had any experience of the Mines and Works Act and the negotiations which have gone on more or less continuously for over 50 years will know that some of these very simple issues do in fact become most appallingly complicated as soon as a discussion starts between the mine owners and the mineworkers; and to invite the Opposition to come into the Minister’s parlour and to give very simple replies to his very simple questions, is something that we will not fall for.

The Minister is very naïve.

The hon. the Minister has dangled before us what the hon. the Minister of Justice yesterday referred to as “ ’n slap riem” and he wants us to get entangled in it. Sir, let me put it this way: If the Opposition is expected to share responsibility with the Minister, for what he does or does not do in relation to the Mines and Works Act, then the whole approach of the Government to the Opposition in regard to this question must be entirely different from what it is now. There are only two conditions on which the Opposition can be drawn into this kind of discussion. If the hon. the Minister wants us to share responsibility with him or to provide him with a parachute before he jumps, then he must approach this in a bipartisan manner; he must then say: “I want you to share responsibility with me.” This means that we will have a bi-partisan mining policy, which means that there will be continous consultation between the Government and the Opposition and constant participation by the Opposition in any discussions which take place. Sir, that is the one alternative.

I never asked you to share responsibility.

Oh yes, you did.

Sir, the hon. the Minister says that he did not invite us to share responsibility. He merely wants us to accept the blame when any problems arise. He can have it in one of two ways: If he wants a bi-partisan policy and he wants us to come into the deal with him, let him make his proposition to the Opposition and we will consider it. The other alternative is this: If he is afraid to take the responsibility himself, there is always the possibility that the Government may resign and invite the Opposition to take over the whole show. But, Sir, his proposition is unacceptable. He wants us to state our policy without being represented in any way in the discussions which, as I have said, are of a highly complicated nature. This, Sir, is unacceptable.

I would like to come now to a different subject and that is the Uranium Enrichment Corporation which was discussed in this Hosse in July. In that discussion I raised certain questions which the Minister invited me to defer for debate on a later occasion. The points I then referred to were particularly those relating to participation by private industry in two ways. The first way I suggested was that private industry should actually participate in the development of fuel production in South Africa—and that includes enrichment—in the sphere of commercialization, of industrial exploration, and in the field of international marketing. That was my first proposal. The second and, in my view, more important, proposal was that private industry should participate on the basis of capital shareholding. Sir, I think the hon. the Minister may have misunderstood my intention because he replied at that time—

Sir, I was not talking about the producion of electricity. I was talking about the major industry which precedes the production of electricity, in other words, the erection of manufacturing plant, the production of fuel and so forth which, as the hon. the Minister knows, is a highly complex and sophisticated industry.

Sir, my case is that you have on the one hand the Atomic Energy Board which consists of some first-class scientists and technologists. They discover certain techniques; they do research and they develop certain techniques for, say, the chemical or physical application of new techniques to the development of uranium. This, when it passes from the laboratory stage through the pilot plant stage, reaches the point where it has to be magnified; it has to be enlarged to a massive industrial scale. While paying tribute to the excellence of the work done by the Atomic Energy Board, I do not believe that scientists and technologists have the industrial skill to translate the laboratory work to an industrial scale or an industrial level. I believe that the skills required for the one task, i.e. the research task, are entirely different from the industrial skills required in the second stage. It is no discredit to the scientists and technologists to say to them that they are not industrialists; the skills are simply quite different. The best example we have is the fact that Britain and France attempted to do what is now being done here by a State corporation and they are are after a number of years being compelled to withdraw from that attempt and to base their development on private enterprise.

Sir, I am not talking pure theory. I would like to mention two cases where in past years the Atomic Energy Board has attempted to develop projects by itself and has failed, and two cases where the Atomic Energy Board has developed projects in close co-operation with private enterprise and has succeeded. The first case I would like to mention was known as Fluorox. That was a process to convert uranium oxide to uranium hexafluoride. This was a new process developed by the Atomic Energy Board and it was done with the full intention of turning it into an industrial process. Now if I were to tell the story of Fluorox in my own words it would be more dramatic, but for the sake of accuracy and to avoid contention I will use the words which the Atomic Energy Board itself has used in its annual reports in describing what happened. In 1965 the Board reported—

That was he first and hopeful report. In 1966 the Board reported—

You might note, Sir, the similarity of the words used to those used the other day in regard to the enrichment process, i.e. the special suitability under South African conditions and the cheapness of small-scale operations. In 1967 the Board reported as follows—

Here we are moving from the stage where research has been completed and industrialization is contemplated and the first doubts begin to creep in. In 1968 they report—

The material inside this reactor was beginning to congeal at temperatures lower than the high temperatures for which the reactor was actually constructed—

We have already heard the argument of the hon. member for Von Brandis in connection with private initiative in the production and interests of our uranium industry. I think the hon. the Minister has already replied to that and indicated the importance and necessity for it to be kept as it is for reasons of security. In particular, he pointed out the fact that private initiative has never been ignored in this connection. In the handling of this matter in the past, the opportunity has, in fact, been given for private initiative to state their point of view and contribute their share by means of those boards and institutions established by the Government. In this respect I cannot, therefore, agree with the hon. member in his argument about allowing more free private initiative.

But there is another important point which the hon. member put forward, and which I briefly want to reply to before I go on to other matters concerning my constituency, and that is that the hon. member referred here to the fact that the Minister “wans us to share his responsibilities” in connection with the labour matters as set out by the hon. the Minister. It is, of course, correct that in this democratic system of Government of ours here in South Africa, the Opposition has a duty to perfrom as part of the Government. But when we see them sitting there on the other side it is very clear that the Opposition is nothing more than a lot of fence-sitters. They are afraid and cannot state their policy or standpoint, as has always been the case in connection with other facets of the national economy. They could not do their duty in connection with the South Africa system of Government. They are guilty of neglecting their duty.

May I ask a question? What is his policy towards our proposal that mineworkers should be underground for 25 years only?

What the hon. member knows of the mining industry is dangerous. He knows himself that there are many mineworkers who can retire after 25 years of service, and there are others who still go on. By means of regular check-ups the Government looks after their health very well. If the Opposition continues with this fencesitting of theirs, and the Government must let matters develop by giving way to the pressures of employers, we shall find ourselves in the same position we were in previously, where the employers were constantly agitating for more non-white labour and greater facilities for the non-Whites within the white areas. That is how in 1904, for example, they even imported people from China, giving rise to an impossible labour situation in the mining industry. At a later stage we had the 1913, 1914 and 1922 strikes in the mining industry, and the reason for that was simply this question of job reservation, which did not then stand on the same firm foundation on which is stands to-day. The fact is that we consequently have labour peace to-day.

But I want to refer to the point raised about the question of safety in the mining industry. In the past year there was, of course, an increase in the accident rate, but there are various reasons for that. If we accept that there was increased production and increased activity in proportion to the ground broken, one can, of course, expect a higher accident rate, because activity increased. Of course, as far as the number of prople employed are concerned, particularly the Whites, it remained constant. The staff employed in the mining industry had not increased. The fact is that by means of research into work mechanization the extent of development projects could increase. Here I should like to give credit to the research unit of the Chamber of Mines, which does research along various lines in an endeavour to refine production methods and to establish greater efficiency with less manpower, manpower that is not always available. On the other hand, as far as the accident rates are concerned, it is satisfying to note that the tendency over the years has constantly been a downward one, and that the death rate has also been reduced. No graph is without fluctuations and upward and downward trends, and the position is explained very clearly in the graph on page 23 of the Department’s report “Mining Statistics, 1969”. There one sees, in contradiction to what the hon. member for Rosettenville said, that the tendency is not in the least disconcerting.

I should like to refer to an aspect in connection with pneumoconiosis. I want to remind the hon. the Minister that the White Paper recommended that the Pneumoconiosis Act should also be applied to South-West Africa. On a previous occasion the Minister said that this was, in fact, the intention, but that it had not yet been put into effect. This is a matter that very intimately concerns the mineworker in South Africa. The Minister gave the assurance that the Pneumoconiosis Act would be amended next year, and that South-West Africa would then be included. In addition, the Minister intimated privately that, although no compensation is payable at present in respect of cases of pneumoconiosis in South-West Africa, such persons, as well as persons who have left the mines in the meantime, will nevertheless receive compensation as soon as the Act is made applicable to South-West Africa, and as soon as the mines where they worked have been declared controlled mines. Seen from this point of view, therefore, mineworkers will not be detrimentally affected as a result of the delay in the application of the Act to South-West Africa. However, I just want to know from the hon. the Minister again, what progress has now been made in the application of the Pneumoconiosis Act to South-West Africa.

Another point I should like to make is that a great deal of valuable data in connection with mining in South Africa appears in this report “Mining Statistics, 1969”. I should like to ask whether similar statistics cannot be made available to this House in respect of mining in South-West Africa. On page 31, for example, I notice a report on dust in mines and industries, a report dealing with the distribution of conimeter dust samples. This data applies only to the Republic’s open works and surface industries, It would create confidence among our workers in South-West Africa … [Time expired].

Mr. Chairman, when my time expired, I was approaching the end of the final chapter in the sad story of the Fluorox experiment. I should merely like to conclude with a quotation from the Atomic Energy Board’s report. It reads as follows:

After about five of six years work and the expenditure of a great deal of money, it was found that the process was not industrially viable. In saying this I do not want to criticize the research work done initially, because it was of a very high quality. What I am saying is that the people concerned were not capable, and could not have been expected to be capable, of carrying out the industrial exploitation which followed the research work.

The same story can be told in regard to their Pelinduna reactor. This was a most ambitious concept to produce a South African type reactor for use in South Africa. It is a long and complicated story and because of the great deal of technical data involved, I shall cut it short by merely referring to what was anticipated of the reactor some six or seven years ago. and then conclude with the sad obituary which was published in 1967. Some six years ago, this was the view taken of the Pelinduna reactor:

That was the hopeful note on which the project started. The project then passed from the research stage and the drawing boards, through the laboratories and the test rigs, until it had to be turned into a practical, industrial operation. The project was then referred to Escom for their views as to whether a reactor of this type could be incorporated into their programme. Escom decided that the reactor, because of its size and its high heat generation, was quite unsuitable for introduction into the South African system. This is a further quotation, taken from the 1967 report of the Atomic Energy Board:

It is my contention that, although the Board is not to be criticized for the most imaginative research work it undertook on these two projects, namely the Fluorox and the Pelinduna projects, criticism is due for the fact that the Board, which is a research and development organization, attempted to go beyond its powers. In other words, it comtemplated a task of industrial exploitation for which it was not fitted and for which it could not be expected to be fitted.

In contrast, there were two other projects. The one was named “Bufflex” and the other was known as “Purlex”. Both these projects were undertaken in close co-operation with the mining industry, with a view to producing a cheaper and better form of uranium concentrate: they are improved extraction processes. They were pursued with vigour by the Board, and the Board deserves every credit, but the work was done in close co-operation with a vast industry which has major industrial experience. The engineers, the businessmen and the economists of the industry worked closely with the scientists of the Atomic Energy Board and between them they hammered out an industrial solution which was economic and viable on a large industrial scale. Both these projects are a credit to the Board and to the mining industry. They have been entirely successful.

I invite the Minister to contrast the sad stories of the Fluorox and Pelinduna projects with the Bufflex and Purlex projects. On the one hand there was a scientific organization trying to develop an industrial project and on the other we saw the Board co-operating closely with private industry and achieving great success.

I am aware that the hon. the Minister contemplates appointing a board of directors for the Uranium Enrichment Corporation. No doubt this board will consist of several businessmen. Sir, this is not good enough. As contemplated at the moment, there will be a large corporation, designed to be built up to full industrial scale. If this were not done, there would be no point in the exercise. It will therefore be a large industry which will operate on a massive scale. It will be run, as far as we can see at the moment, by people who are essentially scientists. It will be run by technologists appointed by the Atomic Energy Board. These people will in fact be guided to some extent by the board of directors, but boards of directors meet in board rooms once a month or once a quarter. They discuss an agenda prepared for them by the people who run the plant, by the managerial staff. They have no direct control over what happens. What is needed is financial participation and physical participation. It is only when these factors are present that one gets direct managerial business skill being applied to running an industry. It is not possible to put in a number of technical staff, to allow them to run this operation and hope they will be guided by businessmen appointed to the board of directors. In a large industrial enterprise which operates efficiently, the organization consists of businessmen, of economists, of entrepreneurs and of financiers who actually run the enterprise. The organization is such that they are in charge. They operate with constant reference to the profit motive. They have at their disposal scientists and technologists who assist them, who advise them, but who have no responsibility for the business decisions. It seems to me that the Uranium Corporation as it is at the moment with 100 per cent shareholding by the State, will consist of an organization organized in a diametrically opposite way. In other words, the Corporation will be run by civil servants, by technologists or by scientists largely supplied by the Atomic Energy Board. They will be in charge of the operation. They will take the decisions. They will merely refer certain matters to the directors of the board for their opinions. In other words, the business skills, the industrial skills will be there in an advisory capacity and not in a controlling capacity.

This simply will not work. I am most alarmed because I think that the Uranium Enrichment Corporation is most promising for South Africa and it is of great importance, It would be tragic if this Corporation were allowed to go the way a couple of these other projects have already gone. It is most essential that we should turn this discovery to the best possible account for South Africa. I sincerely believe that the kind of organization which is being set up, i.e. a purely technical corporation under State control, with some advice from outside, is not the way to run a large industrial enterprise. It will not work. It has been proved in other countries that it does not work. What is needed is a completely new think about this. We have to review our approach to the whole problem, because only by bringing into full play the skills of private enterprise, the full application of the profit motive, the full application of commercial principles and competitivity, can this be done.

Mr. Chairman, I hope the hon. member for Von Brandis will excuse me if I do not follow him in the discussion on uranium. I do not know enough about the processing of uranium to contribute anything sensible towards this debate.

However, I have quite a great deal of sympathy with the ideas expressed by the hon. member for Rosettenville when he asked the hon. the Minister to investigate possible means of limiting the working life of a miner to 25 years. I have expressed that view in this House myself before. Whereas I support the hon. member for Virginia in his request for a commission to investigate again the Pneumoconiosis Act, I wonder whether the hon. the Minister should not consider the possibility of including this proposal in the terms of reference of that commission. In supporting the request by the hon. member for Virginia for such a commission, I would like to raise certain difficulties that members of this House who have mineworkers in their constituencies, experience in the working and practical application of the 1962 Act on Pneumoconiosis. I may in passing just restate the position as it was when this Bill was brought before this House. It will be remembered that there was a lot of misgiving amongst members of this House about various provisions incorporated in the Bill at that time. But on the urging and at the earnest request, of the then General Secretary and members of the Executive of the Mineworkers’ Union and also the undertaking by the then Minister of Mines, that the Act would be reviewed as soon as any real problems should arise, the Bill was allowed passage in this House and was placed on the Statute Book. In this Act, apart from the previously accepted criteria and principles on which a miner was certified as suffering from pneumoconiosis, namely clinical evidence, X-rays of the lungs and history of employment in dusty atmosphere, an innovation was included, namely the cardio respiratory function of the examinee. The classification of the pneumoconiosis sufferer was also brought into the sphere of the cardio respiratory function findings by changing the classification of the first stage to 20 to 50 per cent of cardio respiratory disfunction, the second stage to 50 to 70 per cent of cardio respiratory disfunction and the third stage to 70 per cent, plus, impairment of the cardio respiratory function. By bringing the cardio respiratory function into the certification and classification of the mineworker, the mineworker believed that he would be certified if he became the victim of any disabling disease of his heart or his lungs. He now finds that even though he may be suffering from coronary thrombosis, congestive cardiac failure, chronic bronchitis or emphysema of the lungs, he is not certified because the certifying authority, quite rightly, claims that such disabilities could have manifested themselves without the examinee ever having been subjected to dust inhalation and is therefore only prepared to consider these disabilities when they can be proved to have been caused or aggravated by the inhalation of dust. How one is to assess this, is to my mind open to conjecture because there are no definite means whereby it can be assessed within one or two per cent.

Another point which seriously worries the mineworker is how the examining authority can come to an absolute conclusion that he is suffering from 19 per cent and not 21 per cent of cardio respiratory disfunction attributable to dust inhalation. Nobody and least of all, Sir, myself, has any doubts about the veracity and integrity of the examining authorities, but we feel that it would serve a good purpose if the hon. the Minister would appoint a commission to investigate a new method of certification and classification of mineworkers and pneumoconiosis sufferers. It will contribute much to alleviating the worries and the doubts that the mineworkers have in regard to the Pneumoconiosis Board because they feel they have been let down by this new Act and that they are not really reaping the benefit they hoped to get from it at all. I would like the hon. the Minister to give serious consideration to the request of the hon. member for Virginia to appoint such a commission to reconsider this whole question.

Mr. Chairman, I want to come back to the question of the utilization of non-white miners in the homelands. I must say that this has obviously become an extremely important political issue. What interests me is that the Government has already announced what its policy is in so far as the African mineworkers in the homelands are concerned because the Government’s own publications such as the South African Digest and a recent issue of Bantu both made the same statement to the effect that the State encourages the advancement of Bantu to the most skilled and lucrative mining posts in their own homelands. The policy has been set down. Now all of a sudden, there is vacillation about this. The hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration was extremely uncertain about this. As far as I can see, the advancement of Africans in the platinum mines near Rustenburg has been considerably hindered. Indeed the position is such that very few of the local Africans who come from that reserve are working in the mine. This probably is one of the main reasons why they are not prepared simply to go and work as underground workers but prefer to come out and work in white South Africa. In fact, the majority of those working there are Africans imported from elsewhere—from Portuguese East Africa, from Malawi, from the Transkei and from other parts of South Africa. We have this extraordinary situation that within the Rustenburg Platinum Mine itself, taking the Impala Mine as an example, the vast majority of the 9,000 Africans working there come from outside the area. So the mine is not even providing employment opportunities for the Africans living in the homelands. One of the reasons for that is obviously that if Africans feel they could be trained in order to advance to the lucrative and skilled positions occupied by the white workers, there would be some inducement for them to stay on the mines. I wonder why it is that the Government is so nervous to tackle the Mineworkers’ Union. It is very brave indeed when it has to tackle the Chamber of Industries. I remember the time when section 77 of the Industrial Conciliation Act was under discussion in this House. The Federated Chamber of Industries at that time put out a black bordered pamphlet begging the Government not to go ahead with its policy of job reservation. However, the Government turned a deaf ear towards their plaints and a blind eye to all the evidence which they placed before the Government. We have had another example quite recently with the Physical Planning Act. Once again that brought an uproar from industry towards the Government’s attitude about the siting of industries. Did the Government pay any attention to them?— None at all. More recently we had the Bantu Laws Amendment Act restricting the employment of Africans in all types of jobs. Commerce came out strongly against it, organized commerce, and once again the Government was as “kragdadig” as ever—no attention was paid to them. But one whisper from the Mine-workers’ Union and the Government runs for cover like a nervous rabbit, terrified to tackle the Mineworkers’ Union even when it is palpably unreasonable.

Do you want strikes?

I want strikes just as much, shall I say, as Mr. Vic Robinson, the chief technical adviser to the Chamber of Mines. He quite recently, in reference to the shortage of skilled labour, said that the industry has had to stand by time and time again to see its reasonable endeavours to let everyone take one step up the ladder—which I interpret as “also the Whites”—frustrated either by shortsighted union policy, or by political expediency being given effect to by Government Departments. He said that trade unions had emerged with extreme politically orientated ideas and had split into groups with different political outlooks. I must say that this orientation is much assisted by the wishy-washy nervous attitude taken up by the Official Opposition. They too are frightened to set any lead in this regard—dead-scared their votes might be affected in those seats where the 40,000 odd mineworkers and their families live: both sides are affected by the political implications of daring to tackle the Mineworkers’ Union, even where it is palpably unreasonable and even where it is flying directly in the face of Government policy, such as the policy in the homelands. As far as I can gather …

She does not know what she is talking about.

I know exactly what I am talking about. I know that on the Rustenburg Mines there have been endeavours to try to use Africans in skilled work and I know also that the Mineworkers’ Union has adamantly refused to allow that. It is pinning the Government down to a statement which it made in 1968 that it was not in any way going to change the operation of the Mines and Works Act in the homelands. Can the hon. Minister tell me why it is that he has not done the simple thing of extending these skilled and lucrative jobs to African mine-workers in the homelands? Why has he not taken the simple device of a declaration under regulation 166 of section 7? I am quoting from the Financial Mail. Apparently that is all that has to be done; no great difficulties; no repeal of laws—all that needs be done is that the Government has to make a simple declaration under that regulation.

Who is going to train the Bantu?

If necessary the Government itself should bring in officials to train them. [Interjections.] Then the Government must not talk about raising Africans to skilled and lucrative levels in the homelands.

The white mineworker shall have to do it.

Supposing now forever and a day your white Mineworkers’ Union say that they are not going to train any black men to do these jobs. Then what? That is what has been happening. There is already a shortage of skilled workers on the mines—we all know that. White young men are not coming forward in sufficient numbers to fill those …

The Mine-workers’ Union has not pushed us into any position whatever.

But you are not in any way confronting it with decisions—that is why. The Mineworkers’ Union has not pushed the Government into any position because the Government is taking up the status quo position. Why should the Mineworkers’ Union complain? But let the Government take one step forward and implement its declared policy of allowing skilled Africans to work in the homelands in the mines and the confrontation will come. It is such a confrontation which the Government is not prepared to face.

You wish for such a confrontation.

No, I do not wish anything of the kind. I am asking the Government why it does not apply its own policy; I want to know why economic principles are not being applied where there is a shortage of skilled white labour while African labour which can be trained is available and unused. Everybody knows that Africans can be trained to do these jobs. The old shibboleth that Africans cannot be trusted, that they are not responsible enough, has surely disappeared. All of us have seen Africans trained to do the most skilled jobs, not only here but also in other parts of Africa, certainly in the Copperbelt. I want to know how long the status quo attitude is going to last and at what stage somebody is going to say that it is a ludicrous situation, that if nobody else wants to train them, Government officials will have to do it. I am asking for Government policy. I am not asking for “wild” Progressive Party policy—I am asking for Government policy in this regard, and we are not getting it. The Official Opposition has always stated that it stands by the Mines and Works Act. Do they stand by that Act even in respect of those mines situated in the Reserves? I won’t use the term independent homelands; I use the term Reserves where Africans live in the areas to which the mines belong and are ready and able to be trained for skilled work. We have this ludicrous position as I have said, that in Rustenburg in the platinum mines the vast majority of the 9,000 odd African mineworkers come from outside the area. And the men who could be trained to do skilled work and should be working on the mines are working in the Republic as migrant workers. Their women are being left behind while they work as migrant labourers and at the same time migrant labourers come into the Rustenburg area, thereby creating all sorts of social problems while their women are being left behind in the territories whence they come. It is a most extraordinary situation and it could be resolved by offering some hope to the mine-workers, the Africans who live in the area, that if they go to work as mineworkers they will be able to rise to really lucrative skilled jobs. Is the Government prepared to offer them that hope? If not, will it kindly issue some sort of statement to the effect that what it said in the Digest and in Bantu journals which are widely read overseas, is simply not true? I cannot see that the Government can go on having it both ways in this regard. [Time expired.]

Sir. this is the second time the hon. member for Houghton is interfering in matters concerning the Rustenberg area. The first time was when she drove around with an Indian in our town. She never came near the Bantu area, and I am glad of that because she knows absolutely nothing about the Tswana. She made a statement here concerning the 8,000 Bantu from other areas or countries that are working on the Bafokeng mine, the Impala mine. Sir, foreign Bantu are employed on this mine, but the hon. member for Houghton does not know what she is speaking about, because the Tswana refuse to work in a mine. The hon. member has no knowledge of the Tswana’s way of life. The only Bantu the hon. member for Houghton knows are the agitators in her backyard. She knows absolutely nothing about the overall Bantu population. There is no responsible leader among the Bantu who is prepared to discuss matters with her or to associate with her. Let her realize and understand this. Sir, what is the position in connection with these mines in the homelands? To-day the hon. the Minister stated clearly and unequivocally that, within the framework of the National Party’s policy, opportunities will be granted to the Bantu to make his contribution on an evolutionary basis; he stated this very well, and he did so logically, but this does not satisfy the hon. member for Houghton. No, she sees in this an opportunity for agitation; she sees an opportunity to disrupt the relationships between the Mineworkers’ Union and the Minister and the Government. Sir, let me put it very clearly to the hon. member for Houghton: The Mineworkers’ Union in the Republic of South Africa has great confidence in the hon. the Minister and the National Party.

Oh!

Sir, I want to tell that hon. member: The egg-dance that the hon. member did here to-day is not going to benefit them either. I state here unequivocally that the mineworkers of South Africa are Nationalist; I know them. I have many mine-workers in my constituency, and I say here to-day that they have confidence in the National Party, no confidence in the United Party and contempt for the hon. member for Houghton.

The old Nationalist Party or the present Nationalist Party?

The present National Party and the old National Party.

Both.

There has always been only one National Party throughout the years. I say that the mineworkers have confidence in the National Party, and there are sound reasons for that. I challenge the Opposition to show me where the National Party —whether the Opposition wants to call it old or new. or whatever—has not treated the mineworkers of South Africa fairly. Throughout the years the National Party has treated the mineworkers properly on a principle basis. I want to tell the Opposition that we did not have a 1922 fiasco such as they had. The Opposition must never forget that the mineworkers have great confidence in the National Party and in this Minister. I am confident, and I believe that these negotiations which are now taking place, will be conducted on a high level, and that politics will not be dragged in, as the hon. member for Houghton now wants to do. Sir, in this whole region from Brits, Rustenburg and Thabazimbi to Ellisras, there is mineral wealth comparable to that of the Witwatersrand complex. Sir, I shall support this statement. This entire area will develop into a second Witwatersrand complex. This demands extensive planning, and embodies great benefits for the Republic of South Africa. What is, in addition, of great importance is that this mineral wealth is not restricted to the white area or to the homeland area; this mineral wealth is to be found in the entire area, in the Bantu area as well as the white area. It is of great importance that this wealth also lies in the Bantu areas. It will make a big contribution to the development of the Tswana area. These mineral riches are of great and inestimable value as resources for the development of the homelands. Sir, I want to tell you that at this stage there are no less than about 30,000 morgen of land on which platinum is mined. Since April of this year the market value of platinum has been published for the first time. For the quarter April-June 1970 the market value of platinum was R31 million. Hon. members will now realize what the value of platinum in that area is. There are large mines in the process of development. We have the Impala mine that has spent about R30 million there. There is fine devellopment taking place there. Sir, I want to tell the hon. member for Houghton that the directors of Union Corporation are responsible people, and there is a very high level of cooperation between the Impala mine or Bafokeng mine and the Department of Mines. The hon. member will never succeed in implicating them in doing irresponsible things, or in causing friction between the white mineworkers and the Bantu in those areas. Develop ment is taking place in an orderly way, and there is sincere co-operation. The hon. member for Houghton will not succeed in causing confusion We are dealing here with responsible people. They are not irresponsible people like the hon. member for Houghton. We also have J.C.I. with their Rustenburg Platinum Mine. There are already shafts covering a 27- mile area. It is difficult to believe that such gigantic development is taking place. The Rustenburg Platinum Mine has shafts covering a 27-mile area where the mining of platinum is taking place. We have there the largest platinum mine in the world. Then there is the Lohrno$$$$$ Group which is engaged in a R55 million development programme in the constituency of the hon. member for Brits, and there is also additional development taking place there. Under these circumstances I think this House will realize that this area is going to become a tremendous growth point in the years ahead. It is therefore essential that discussions should already be held at this stage in confection with the whole relationship between the homeland and the white area, and in connection with matters concerning employees: but this must take place at a level that cannot cause friction. I would appreciate it if the hon. member for Houghton would keep her nose out of that area, because she is continually engaged in disturbing relationships, and at this stage, in South Africa’s interests, she should rather pay attention to her old black spot where she is happy, where she is a small queen. Let her leave those areas alone where responsible people are engaged in large-scale development and expansion.

Thank you for the advice.

Sir, I want to go further and put a request to the hon. the Minister. As a result of the large-scale developments taking place, we have now reached the stage where a mining school would be of great importance. We already have a technical college. We are receiving very fine co-operation from the large mining magnates. In the areas where mines are being developed, they are willing to make contributions towards the schools. I know, for example, that after a visit I paid there a few months ago one of the large mining companies gave R1,000 as a contribution to the technical college. I mention this merely to indicate to the hon. member for Houghton that she must not be under the impression that there is perhaps bad feeling between the managements of these mines and the National Party, because when all is said and done I represent the National Party in my constituency, and I can tell the hon. member for Houghton that although the mining magnates and I perhaps differ politically—if that is the case; I do not believe that it is so—theirs is a responsible attitude. I am convinced that the approach of the Mine-workers’ Union is a responsible approach. They realize that in South Africa we have a policy to carry out, a policy of development along individual lines, and that we will not be stampeded and will not violate this policy. If one were to violate this policy it would, in my opinion, be the beginning of the end. Our entire concept, our whole approach to mining. must be an approach of honesty and sincerity towards the Mineworkers’ Union and the Bantu in their own area. But this development must take place on an ordered, responsible basis, and not on a loose basis, as the hon. member for Houghton expects, with all manner of concessions being granted overnight. Sir, the impression is being created here by the hon. member that the Minister is afraid of the Mineworkers’ Union. [Time expired.]

Sir, I know that the hon. member for Rustenburg will excuse me if I do not follow the arguments which he has raised here. I wish to raise another topic with the hon. the Minister in the few minutes I have at my disposal. I want to discuss with the Minister the country’s export potential in respect of iron and manganese ore. This is a subject that has created tremendous interest in recent months. But if one is to judge from the spate of reports which appear in the Press from time to time and also from reports that we have had from Ministers at different times, there appears to me to be considerable confusion in respect of this important matter. If we look at the latest report of the Department of Mines, we find that on page 18 it refers to iron ore and says—

Sir, I think it is common knowledge that we in the Republic have some of the richest iron and manganese ore deposits in the world. For confirmation of this we only have to refer to the South African Digest of 28th August, which refers to the western treasure trove, “a treasure house yet to be fully developed and awaiting adequate rail transport”. Then it goes on to say—

It then goes on to say—

Sir, this is for the future; but I want to talk about what can be done at the present time. We know that the Japanese want our iron ore because it is of high quality. They are prepared now to take 10 million tons per annum from us. They have expressed a desire to purchase it; they have shown their need to have it, but we are not in a position to deal with the Japanese at this stage. The limiting factor is simply that we in the Republic are not in a position to ship our iron ore from the North Western Cape to Japan in ore carriers of the right size to make this undertaking worthwhile. Sir, I think it is right at this stage to ask the hon. the Minister of Mines whether he thinks it is in the interests of the national economy to postpone the day when South Africa can freely participate in this lucrative trade. If we are going to wait for Saldanha, then we are certainly postponing the day when we will be in a position to participate in that trade. We know that the supply is there; we know that the demand is there but we have not got the wherewithal to get our ore exported. Sir, when one studies the position and compares our ore ventures with those of Australia, then our efforts are extremely disappointing. I have said that our reserves are something like 10,000 million tons. We require only 6 million tons of iron ore per annum at the present stage for our present industries. Of this tremendous reserve we are exporting only 2 million tons per annum. I believe that this is most disappointing when you compare this with what Australia is doing. Sir, the point is that Australia is making free use of private enterprise. They are the people who really got the Australian iron ore export trade off the ground. Sir, is it in the interests of our national economy to restrict our iron ore exports for several years to come to ships of less than 45,000 tons when by using bigger ships our freight charges can be considerably reduced and we can thus make our iron ore, landed in the country that wants to use it, freely competitive? At present we are using these small ships and we simply cannot offer our ore at a price at which the Japanese want to buy it. I ask, too, whether it is in the interest of our national economy to allow the interests of Iscor to dominate the future development of our export iron ore trade when private enterprise is willing and able now to participate and to place the orders and to get them exported. We seem to be constricted to the activities of Iscor. I believe that Iscor plays a dominant role in deciding what the future of our ore export trade is going to be. After all, we are a free enterprise country, and all that is required of the State is to allow a free rein. They have asked for it and they are waiting for Government approval, and if they are given that approval, they are in a position to use the full capacity of the line which at present serves Algoa Bay.

Will they buy it from Iscor?

They have their own ore in the North Western Cape and they are prepared to export it at this stage. At present at Port Elizabeth they are in a position to export up to 5 million tons, and private initiative is prepared to use the full potential of that harbour, and what is more, if private initiative is given a free hand they are prepared to get stuck in immediately to provide an ore terminal at Algoa Bay in order to place South Africa in a position to export ore up to 10 million tons per annum, using vessels of 150,000 tons, because these are the only vessels that will make this project worth while. As long as we are confined to exporting our ore in vessels of approximately 45,000 tons, we simply cannot compete on the overseas market. With these vast resources of iron ore and with our economy in the position in which it is to-day. where we are crying out for exports to assist in balancing our payments problems, I believe we need an explanation and I think this hon. Minister owes us an explanation as to why we are not allowing private enterprise to exploit the vast store of iron ore of very high quality that we have. It is as good as any in the world, having 65 per cent iron content. It compares with the best that Australia has. Our mining is cheap, probably cheaper than anywhere else in the world So we are sitting pretty We have the ore and we can mine it cheaply, and all we require is an export terminal where we can make use of the biggest ships possible in order to compete on the world market for ore. It seems to me that there has been an error of judgment on the part of the authorities. There has been much speculation whether Saldanha or St. Croix should be developed, but this is not a quarrel between Saldanha and St. Croix; I believe there is room for both and I cannot see any reason why the Government should not give the green light for the development of the Algoa Bay project. If we look at what can be expected in the future, we find that we are in a position to export 50 million tons of iron ore per annum to the various markets, and if we are in a position to supply that amount of ore then, to say the very least, we would require both Algoa Bay and Saldanha. I am just making the point to the hon. the Minister that I believe we have a bona fide case for the Government to give its serious attention to developing both these ore terminals. The people in the Eastern Cape will have no quarrel whatsoever if the Minister decides to develop Saldanha Bay. We can see all the advantages. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Walmer dealt with a very important matter here this afternoon, partly in a very responsible way, but partly also very irresponsibly. One cannot find any fault with his plea for the development of his area; one sympathizes with that, but what one finds very regrettable about the hon. member is that he came along here and launched an attack on Iscor, which for many years has done excellent work for the economic growth of our country, and which to-day is probably able to continue with that good work. On this side of the House one cannot find fault with a plea about private initiative also having a say in economic development, but I want to say that I do not think there is any other country as economically free as South Africa. But why come along again, as the United Party also did, for that matter, with the establishment of Iscor, to criticise this institution for the work that is being done?

Sir, please just allow me to refer very briefly to one small matter which was touched upon earlier to-day by the hon. member for Rosettenville. The hon. member referred to the accident rate on the mines, and he mentioned certain figures. One cannot find any fault with that, but he did not tell the full story. Percentage-wise the accident figure on our mines is the lowest in the world, and there is, in fact, a constant decrease in the number of accidents. If one looks at the accident figure for 1964. one sees that it was 1.23 per 1,000 for all mines. In 1965 it was 1.33, in 1966, 1.22, in 1967. 1.30 per 1,000 and in 1968 it was as low as 1.09 per 1,000. I say, without fear of contradiction, that this is a remarkable achievement. I referred to that last year, and to-day I want to repeat what I said at the time, that I should very much like to make use of the opportunity to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his officials, who were involved in this matter, very warmly on the success they are achieving in keeping the accident figure in our mines as low as it is.

The hon. member for Houghton sounded a new note here this morning. The hon. member very pointedly and categorically made the statement that the Government is afraid of the Mineworkers’ Union. But what is the position at present? Is that hon. member, with her reference to the Government and the Mine-workers’ Union, agitating for the destruction of trade unions in this country? Is that her standpoint, or is her standpoint that only certain trade unions should be destroyed for example the trade unions which traditionally only enrol Whites as members? I think the time has come for the mineworkers as such, in whom she has no interest, to take note of the standpoint the hon. member adopted here this morning.

I very briefly want to focus the hon. the Minister’s attention on the statement that was made in the House on 20th July of this year by the hon. the Prime Minister in connection with the enrichment of uranium. I want to say that I think it fitting for us to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the hon. the Prime Minister, the Government and the hon. the Minister for having made it possible for our scientists, under the guidance of Dr. Roux and Dr. Grant, to undertake this project. I do not think that our people truly realize the magnitude of the success and achievements of our scientists; and because they must remain anonymous for obvious reasons, and cannot be honoured in public for their wonderful discovery, I want to call upon the Trustees of the H. F. Verwoerd Foundation this morning to give serious consideration to awarding the next H. F. Verwoerd prize to the scientists who, in some or other way, were involved in the development of the process for the enrichment of our uranium. Perhaps it would even not be inappropriate for the State to consider making a contribution to this Foundation in order to make it possible for a full-fledged grant to be awarded to every individual scientist, even though that grant cannot be made in public, and even though it must be made anonymously, so that the country can at least have the satisfaction of knowing that they have received their due for this remarkable achievement of theirs.

I also want to refer very briefly to another matter which is something of a problem, particularly for us on the East Rand. With the closing of the gold mines a considerable number of mineworkers are pushed out of their jobs for various reasons before their normal retirement age. Some of them, with the best will in the world, cannot avail themselves of offers to transfer to other mines, because they have lived their whole lives there on the East Rand; other individuals have other reasons; for many the question is also that the mines cannot make further provision for them. And I want to say that if the matter is already a problem, it is going to become an even greater problem in the next few years. There are many mineworkers in their fifties, and perhaps a little older, who still have small children at school; it is exceedingly difficult for them when they are deprived of their livelihood. They only obtain their pensions two years after the have left the service of the mines, and in the meantime they must care for their families. What is the result? In many cases their health is no longer very good either, and now they must go to a factory to take up a job there at an inferior remuneration—if I may use the term; I say it with every good intention—which does not give them the same income as that to which they were accustomed. They are also faced with the problem that because of their physical condition they are not always able to do that work properly; they are in no position to be very choosy. I do not have an instant solution for this problem, but I want to ask whether the hon. the Minister cannot give attention to this matter and see in what way these people can be helped, people who have given good service over many years and who are now placed in this difficult position as their lives are drawing to a close.

In conclusion I also want to take this opportunity, on behalf of our mineworkers, to express appreciation and thanks to the Government for the increase in the travelling allowance payable when they have to go to the Medical Bureau for check-ups. On 31st March of last year the travelling allowance was increased from 2½ cents to 5 cents a mile. I think it was a very necessary increase, but now there is a problem. Many of the mine-workers, who are no longer connected with a mine, now find that they are told that they are not entitled to claim for their travelling costs. I want to ask whether arrangements cannot be made, in the form of a practical measure, for a claim form to be available when they report for their check-up, a form which they may complete so that the travelling allowance can be paid out to them.

The hon. member for Springs, who has just sat down, has highlighted the problem which was of course foreshadowed many years ago and which was voiced on this side of the House by the then hon. members for Benoni and Springs in regard to this difficulty of the dying mines. It is a problem which has to be faced up to. We on this side of the House realized that this difficulty would arise after the mines had passed their useful life and had closed down. The workers affected would then have to be absorbed. Schemes of retraining were suggested to the Government. Such schemes are undertaken all over the world. The persons affected would have to be retrained and absorbed by industry. Furthermore, this highlights the fact that if the average worker is protected by some form of pension on which he can live, either by the State or by the industry concerned, he will not be affected to the extent he is affected at the present moment. We havt a great deal of sympathy for these affected persons, and the retraining and settling of these people affected by the mines that are closing is something to which the Government must give attention.

Much has been said about labour on the mines. The hon. members for Von Brandis and Rosettenville have outlined the background to the attitude of this side of the House. I was disappointed to hear the hon. member for Rustenburg say that the Mine-workers’ Union is Nationalist Government-orientated. In other words, he said that they support the Government. Sir, it is quite obvious that the hon. member has never had anything to do with unions or labour matters, because the keystone of any labour movement is not to be orientated to any political party. If you want to get into real trouble as far as the Mineworkers’ Union or any other union is concerned, you only have to suggest that they be orientated to a political party.

I said “the mine-workers”, not “the Mineworkers’ Union”.

You said “the Mineworkers’ Union”. The fact of the matter is that the responsibility for labour conditions rests with the mineworkers and their employers. The last thing the Government should do is to interfere in this very delicate subject. I have complete confidence that this union can run its own affairs without the interference of the Government. The Government of any state should never dictate to the workers as to what they should do or as to the conditions they should work under. I think hon. members should realize that the Mines and Works Act was negotiated by the workers and the employers. It was given statutory force by this House, but let us not get involved and ask the Government to interfere in this very delicate subject.

It was interesting to listen to the hon. the Minister talking about the developments that have taken place in regard to Soekor. I think the whole country is very interested to hear of these developments. I hope that one day we shall hear the announcement that we have struck oil in sufficient quantities to make us independent of overseas imports. I have great confidence that that will be the case. I think the money that has been spent, is being well spent. I think development should continue in that direction. In other countries, where it was at one stagt thought that there was no oil, oil was in fact found. Australia is one such country.

The Government started off by taking a dynamic step as far as the search for oil is concerned. I should like to follow the hon. member for Walmer in his plea for similar energy on the part of the Government in the mining and export of other ores. I am speaking in particular of iron ore. This point was made by the hon. member for Walmer. He mentioned Australia. Let us look at what has been done in Australia. According to statements in the Australian Press, it is said quite openly that Australia one day hopes to be the workshop of the world as far as the export of ores is concerned. Let us look at the quantities of ore they hope to ship in the near future. They say that exports of iron ore and pyrites increased in value from 75 million dollars in 1967 to more than 139 million dollars in 1968 and that, according to contracts signed as at 30th June, 1969, export income from iron ore is expected to exceed 254 million dollars by 1970. Australia is therefore going to town as far as iron ore exports are concerned. They are exporting not only to Japan, but also to Europe and other countries in the Northern hemisphere. If they are to export to Europe, they have to contend with a very long sea route. They do, however, have the initiative. Private enterprise there is going places. They are building railway lines and ports. It is interesting to see how they have almost overnight built export ports. They have not gone to sleep on this subject.

I should like to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister to try to induce the Government to become a little more active. They should show the same spirit in regard to our other minerals as in regard to oil. We have always lived under the prosperous umbrella of being one of the largest gold producers in the world. We are also warned that the mines may peter out one day. I do not think that this will happen in my time, but they do say that we can expect a reduction in our gold production. Sir, we should not just sit back under this umbrella. We should go to town as far as our other ores are concerned as well. Let us look forward to the next decade. Australia is planning for the next 20 years. Let us try to emulate the spirit of Australia. Years ago there was hardly any minerals in Australia worth working, but that country has progressed to such an extent that to-day she is becoming a giant exporter of iron ore and other ores.

Surely the export of ores is not the function of the Department of Mines?

Yes, that is so, but the Department of Mines and the Government should provide the incentive to private enterprise to go ahead with this type of project. We find that there are stumbling blocks all along the line. Private enterprise is interested in developing the export of these ores, but they find the greatest difficulty when negotiating with the Government. The conditions laid down become very costly. The idea, when you are exporting any ore, is to obtain that ore at the lowest possible cost at our ports in order to compete. The Government should encourage production wherever they can by making the necessary facilities available. It is not very pleasant to read that Iscor, our major steelworks, is importing steel slab in order to process it in our country. The point is that the works are too small.

That has nothing to do with this Minister, but we have the ores and the necessary know how, and this shows a lack of planning. One aspect in which the Government has failed all along is that they have failed to plan ahead. The Government should plan for the next 20 years. I say that the Minister should see whether the Government cannot encourage the increased export of ores from this country. It earns us foreign exchange which we urgently require in this country. [Time expired.]

In a nutshell, what the hon. member for Salt River said by implication was that the Government was not looking after the country’s economy. If the hon. member does not know much about the exporting of ore, and the circumstances and problems facing the people who export it, and the people buying it on the other side, he should rather have said nothing about it. In the same spirit I want to refer to similar statements about which quite a fuss was made by the hon. member for Von Brandis during the Second Reading. For example, he also touched upon the question of the exporting of our base ores, claiming that it would improve our balance of trade if we could give it a push, citing this as a solution to the problem of our vanishing gold production and its role as a substitute in the balance of trade. The hon. member alleged that South Africa had some of tht world’s largest reserves, and that we should consequently export these base ores.

For example, the hon. member mentioned chromium. In this connection I want to state that there are certain problems connected with the exporting of chromium. South Africa’s ores are low-grade ores. The high iron content of Transvaal ores is regarded as an unfavourable factor, while the iron content of chromium is of importance to industry. The physical condition of the ore is, of course, also of importance. It is extremely important, for example, whether the ore is in the form of lumps or small particles. The needs of the manufacturers, alias the buyers of the ore, determine the nature of their smelting facilities. We must bear in mind the capital investment the individual has already made in the form of smelting ovens for a specific type of ore. The hon. member for Salt River says that our iron ore. and all our other mineral sources, should be exported. This depends, however, upon whether or not there is a demand for that ore. It also depends upon the buyer, who is a fastidious man, because he has already invested in smelting ovens which need a great deal of capital to erect. The problem with chromium is that this Transvaal ore is rich in iron, and what applies to chromium is also applicable to the impurities in our other export ores. The installations of the buyers of our ore may be of such a nature that they cannot, in their smelting processes, take the problem of the iron content into account. That is the reason why, for certain purposes the Rhodesian chromium is actually preferable to the South African chromium ores.

I am thinking here of the influence of the impurities on the stratification and particularly the melting point, which must be borne in mind at all timts. That is why the buyer is selective, and his decision depends upon whether he needs metallurgical or ferro-chromium, and upon whether it is to be applied for chemical purposes or for fire resistant products. Allowances must be made for the international demand for a particular chromium product. I can say that approximately 45 per cent of the world’s chromium is used for the manufacturing of ferro-chromium, about 40 per cent for the manufacturing of fire resistant products and about 15 per cent in the chemical industry.

The Transvaal ore is chiefly used in the chemical industry, and in the manufacturing of fire resistant products. In the early sixties a process was developed for the manufacturing of stainless steel, specifically from this iron-bearing chromium ore. How industry adapts itself to a special ore with specific impurities is a question of technological progress. The impurities in a body of ore differ from place to place and from country to country. Apart from the physical factors there is also the question of transport. The hon. member for Salt River boasted of the ore that Australia exports, but he forgot to say that a great deal of it lies near the coast, by comparison with South Africa, with its ore deposits that lie far inland. [Time expired.]

Business suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.20 p.m.

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry the hon. member for Houghton is not present in the House this afternoon because I should like to take up something which she said earlier to-day. I must say that not only the House generally, but certainly this side of the House, was very much taken aback by what I think was rather an irresponsible attitude on this very important question, namely the introduction of Bantu labour into the mining world on an ever-advancing scale. The hon. member suggested to the hon. the Minister that he should ignore the Mine-workers’ Union and proceed to take action of his own accord. We regard that as a rather flippant approach to an important matter. It is something which is causing a great deal of concern generally. It is a problem that does not exist only at this stage in the economic life of the country; it is something which has concerned us for very many years and which has been a bone of contention. One would have expected from the party which she represents, and of which she is the mouthpiece, a much more responsible approach on this subject.

On the other hand, I should like to say to the hon. the Minister that I think he was rather kindly dealt with by the hon. member for Von Brandis. The hon. the Minister should not in the manner in which he threw out certain challenges this morning, try and make this subject a political football in the economic life of South Africa to-day. We are concerned in trying to resolve a problem which has arisen more acutely these days because of the shortage of manpower. What one looks for to-day is an attitude of goodwill and cooperation in trying to solve a problem which is important to the whole country. This is not merely a matter which this side of the House asks the Government to resolve. We have given our point of view, our policy and our attitude in this matter. We have stated our policy of negotiation and discussion in order to bring about a situation which would not leave the labour position volatile but which should rather bring about a sense of understanding, co-operation and harmony in the development of the Bantu in this country as well as the preservation of the rights of those who are entitled to maintain their own position in the economy. In this respect we expect from the hon. the Minister an attitude of goodwill and understanding. I do not believe that he can just throw down challenges by saying: Give me your answer. Do you want this or do you want that? If the hon. the Minister wants this party to work with him, to advise and co-operate with him, he has to be very much more factual with us. He has to take us into his confidence as well and bring about some platform of discussion between us where we can give him the advice and co-operation which he seeks. This is something I can well understand any responsible Minister will look for in these particular days. This problem arises more particularly and more acutely because of the manpower shortage.

I should like to refer the hon. the Minister to one or two statements that have been made by people who are associated with this particular problem in order to indicate how interested they are and how solutions can be found. Before I quote these excerpts to the hon. the Minister, I should like to say that there is no question whatsoever that in any field of undertaking, particularly in the mining field, where the aspects of safety, technological skill and other forms of technical skill are important factors, training, too, is a very important factor. Training is important not only to one section of the population but to all sections, no matter what particular level of work they undertake. We find that on the 18th August. 1970, a statement appeared in the Rand Daily Mail by an official of the Underground Officials Association. That is an important body which should be taken into consideration by the hon. the Minister. I quote—

He says his main plan is that a number of white workers who work in lower grade mines could be used much more effectively in the better graded mines which will be to the greater advantage of the mining industry because of the production of these various mines. I quote further:

He goes on to say:

Here is an indication of a plan which somebody has put forward and which could well merit the attention of the hon. the Minister. This is carried further by the Anglo-American Corporation in the mines where they are faced with this problem. There is a further report, an earlier one in the Rand Daily Mail. I quote:

I quote from the report:

This is how seriously they regard the manpower shortage. As far as this side of the House is concerned, it is clear policy that we do not wish to displace white workers in the mines in order to take in Bantu labour. We say that in an advancing economy such as that of South Africa and with the manpower shortage we have, there is room for every section of the community and it is merely a matter of training and negotiation in order to assess at what level the Bantu can be employed in the mines. This can be brought about if the hon. the Minister takes the initiative in advancing these negotiations, in initiating these negotiations and in ensuring that by give and take some form of understanding will eventually be reached. In that sense we could follow the policy we have always advocated and that is that you are only able to bring about peace and harmony in the industry which has had such a difficult career over the past years, by proper negotiations. That is as far as labour is concerned.

I would like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to another base mineral with regard to which the hon. the Minister could give us some information. That is in regard to the tiger eye industry. The hon. the Minister has accepted a report from an interdepartmental committee and by 1971 he will entirely prohibit export of crude tiger eye minerals. The objective is to bring about the possibility of building up a new industry in South Africa and to enable our own community to become skilled in the art of cutting and polishing these stones. This can ensure a better export market and it can improve our balance of payment by the acquisition of foreign capital for our country. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Jeppes who has just sat down raised two matters. Firstly, he raised the question of tiger’s eye production. He is quite correct in saying that we have taken certain steps gradually to stop the export of tiger’s eye. The reason is that this very valuable mineral is only found in South Africa. I foresee a very prosperous future for this particular mineral, provided it is processed in South Africa. My Department has taken the initiative in this matter, firstly by prohibiting exports and, secondly, to try and put up or arrange for a co-operative basis of processing this particular mineral. We have not been very successful up to now and have taken other steps to see if we cannot interest certain parties in coming into this industry to do the proper processing. We hope that we will be successful in this regard and I would like to make an appeal to private enterprise, especially in the mining field, to take a keener interest in the development of this very promising industry. I am quite sure that in this way they can make a great contribution towards South Africa’s economy. After all, this mineral is only found in South Africa and nowhere else. Why can it not then play the same role as, for example, diamonds? I can, however, assure the hon. member that the Department has taken the initiative to interest private enterprise in this particular matter. The Government does not intend to handle the matter itself.

The other remarks the hon. member made was in connection with labour in our mines in general, White as well as non-White, especially Bantu labour. If I may say so the hon. member has missed the point on a number of issues. Firstly, he said that it was my duty to take the initiative in this regard. I can assure the hon. member that I have taken the initiative right from the beginning with all these people and that I would like to keep the initiative. Secondly, the hon. member said that in this way peace and harmony could be brought about. I do not want the impression to be created that there is no peace and harmony. There is perfect peace and harmony in the labour field as far as mining is concerned to-day. We are very grateful to the Chamber of Mines and to the trade unions for it. That is the situation to-day.

The third point the hon. member made was in connection with the shortage of labour. I would like to remind the hon. member that the president of the Chamber of Mines referred to this particular question in his annual speech where he made the rather significant point that there is not only a shortage of skilled labour, but also of unskilled labour in our mining industry. It is, therefore, not only the skilled side we have to consider, but also the unskilled. Then the hon. member said that we must approach this matter with an attitude of goodwill and of understanding. If ever a Minister has approached the trade unions and the Chamber of Mines in a spirit of goodwill and of understanding, I have done it over the past year. I can tell this Committee to-day, and I am grateful for it, that there is a situation to-day of complete trust, and not only understanding, between the trade unions, myself and my Department and the Chamber of Mines. One can only hope that this will continue. I will certainly go out of my way to see to it that this happy situation does continue. Where the hon. member completely missed the point is where he said that I was looking for advice and co-operation from the Opposition. I never asked for their advice or co-operation.

You did, yesterday.

No, but I asked for clarity. After all I have to go into discussions with these people. I am busy with discussions with these people at the moment. The hon. member did help me. He made the point, for instance, that there should be training. Well, we all agree. People cannot be put into certain jobs in the mines unless they have been trained. But then he made a very significant point, namely that Whites should not be displaced. That helps me tremendously. That certainly clarified the position and strengthened my point. I am indebted to the hon. member for saying that. But I am seeking more clarity, namely, at what level should one give exemptions for the training, if any, of Bantu in the homeland mines? As miner or shift boss? I am quite sure hon. members could have given me a little more help in replying to these questions. I am not saying these are simple questions, but those are the matters that one will have to discuss.

Yes, but before we can give the answers, we will have to know some of the details of the negotiations.

No, not at all. One must have a stand on policy in these matters. That hon. member did help me. He said that at least they must be promoted as far as miners. So I have it now that the Official Opposition is prepared to have Bantu promoted or trained and put into jobs as miners. Does the hon. member agree?

As long as a white man is not displaced.

That is the second point made by the Opposition.

Nobody is asking for the white man to be displaced.

No, we are not arguing the point. We are agreed on that. Whatever we do, the Official Opposition and the Government party are agreed on the point that the white man must not be displaced. The negotiations will have to go much further than this. I am only sorry that hon. members were not prepared this morning to tell me what exactly their attitude was. But I leave it at that.

I now come to the hon. member for Salt River. He raised the question of the training of people who leave the mines. I may tell the hon. member that at the moment the siuation is that, according to the Act, any person who is in receipt of a pension, is entitled to be trained and to be paid for this training. Unfortunately, very few people make use of it. The hon. member might have had in mind a situation where there is unemployment in the mines. Well, that does not exist at the moment, but if it ever does occur, the Government will naturally take a very great interest in creating facilities for the training of these miners. But on the whole, they are just not interested.

In regard to the question of our export of iron ore, I might deal with this while also dealing with the hon. member for Walmer, who also raised the question. Most of the points hon. members raised, are unfortunately matters which fall under my colleague’s Vote, the Minister of Economic Affairs. But may I point out in what way the Department of Mines is interested in this particular question of the export of ore, whatever ore it is, in this particular instance iron. In the first place, we as Department of Mines, must be the watchdog to see that, if there are not sufficient quantities of a certain ore, such a product is not exported. I think that is our bounden duty to posterity. In the case of iron ore, we know that we have vast deposits of iron ore, especially in the Postmasburg area, something like, if I am correct, 5,000 to 6,000 million tons. At the moment our consumption is something like 6 million tons a year and we are exporting about 5 million tons. So there is no question about it that we could export high grade iron ore without endangering the future of South Africa. That is one function of the Department of Mines. The second one is that if an ore is exported, we should see to it that that particular mineral is processed to the highest possible degree before exportation. That we are certainly doing in the case of platinum and in many other cases.

I think it was the hon. member for Walmer who said that from newspaper reports it appears that there was confusion regarding the negotiations with the Japanese. As far as the Government is concerned, there is no confusion at all and as far as Iscor is concerned, there is no confusion either. The hon. member will realize that large quantities are involved here. First of all, the matter is tied up with the export of coke and also to a certain extent with the processing of the iron ore. I think we must aim at the eventual goal of exporting pig-iron rather than iron ore. All these matters are under consideration at the moment. I had a talk with Mr. Kotze, the General Manager of Iscor, only this week and I can assure the hon. member that we are not unduly worried about the whole issue and that the negotiations are proceeding satisfactorily.

The hon. member also asked why private enterprise does not have the opportunity of exporting. First of all, I am convinced that private enterprise is not in the possession of such large quantities that it can meet the export demand. The demand runs into millions and millions of tons. Secondly I should like to make it quite clear that there is no prohibition as such on the export of iron ore by private enterprise. The same difficulties regarding harbour facilities and Railways facilities which Iscor encounters, also exist for private enterprise. That point must, however, be raised with my colleague, the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs, Lastly I should like to say that I do not want the idea to be created that Iscor is not fully capable of dealing with the situation. The Government has full confidence in the Iscor organization. We are sure that they will be able to cope with this problem in the same way as private enterprise would have done. They may perhaps even cope more easily with the problem, because they have all the experience.

*The hon. member for Springs referred to visits paid by mineworkers for the purpose of being examined. I am pleased that the hon. member raised that point. Whenever miners want to have benefit examinations, they are either entitled to a train-ticket or to an allowance of 5 cents per mile. The hon. member made the point that the miners would perhaps not know about it owing to the fact that they might already have left the mine. I shall ask my Department to investigate the practical aspect of the matter. However, whenever a miner wants a periodic examination, it is not the function of my Department to pay for such travelling-expenses. The object of such a visit by a miner is, therefore, merely to get his red card in order once again. This does not have any connection with our obligations in terms of the Pneumoconiosis Act. As regards the other aspect, we shall pay attention to it. In the first place, my obligation relates to the worker who may be suffering from a coniosis or who is already receiving a pension for it. We shall definitely look into the matter. In terms of the Pneumoconiosis Act we are under no obligation as regards periodic examinations.

A second point that was raised by the hon. member, was in regard to officials at marginal mines who had to be transferred or leave the service, as the mine had to close down or was on the point of being closed down. Now, I can understand his problem. But my information is that many of them do not accept the alternative employment within that mining group at another place. If this is not possible, very strong attempts are made to place such persons at another mine. Previously there were arrangements to the effect that certain information, etc., had to be made available in this regard. The present arrangement is that those people for whom there is no longer any employment, are looked after very carefully by the Government Mining Engineer. I shall give instructions again that very strict action be taken in this regard. Now I want to point out in a friendly way—and I think our miners should take cognizance of this—that the majority of the workers in South Africa have to change their place of residence. Take the public servant, for instance. He is transferred to places far and near. Even hon. members of this House are birds of passage. For six months of the year we must be in the Cape. I do want to make this appeal to our miners, i.e. that although they are to a certain extent location-orientated at present, they must appreciate that it does, after all, form part of the economy of any country that one’s sphere of employment may change sooner or later. What is most important, and what one should be grateful for, is that a person is in fact offered alternative employment. I want to tell the hon. member that I shall ask once again that where such cases do occur and employment is not offered, it will have to be ensured—and I think this can be done if we bear in mind the manpower shortage— that such a person will at least not be unemployed.

The hon. member for Springs also raised the question of the great achievement by Dr. Roux and Dr. Grant and the whole team there at Pelindaba. The hon. member mentioned that the Government had confidence in these people as scientists. Now I want to tell the hon. member that this decision was taken before my time. To a very large extent it was really on the part of the Government that this decision was taken at the time. There was not only confidence in the Pelindaba team of scientists, but it was actually an act of faith. Along with him I want to say that we who belong to the later generations are very grateful for these decisions having been taken in the early sixties. These were great decisions. To take a decision on millions of rand in regard to which there was no certainty, is a great decision. I want to say to-day that the scientists who were involved in this matter, were so modest throughout that they actually envisaged the possibility of succeeding to be much smaller than it actually was. To me this is one of the fine features of this whole matter.

Now, the hon. member mentioned the possibility of a Verwoerd Award, and said that the Government had to grant the highest recognition and make an award to these people. I do not want to comment on that now. I think that both the Verwoerd Trust and the Government will in good season do their duty in this regard, if they consider it necessary. I just want to say that we should have no illusions about this being an achievement for which it is impossible to make too high an award. Knowing what these people have accomplished, I must say this. I think I should leave the matter at that. I hope this reaches the ears of the Verwoerd Trust and other people who may decide on such matters.

The hon. member for Rustenburg raised a few matters here. I want to start with the last matter he raised, i.e. the question of a school for miners at Rustenburg. The establishment of a school for miners is, of course, a matter which has to be considered in consultation with the mining industry. I shall definitely go into this matter to see what we can do in this regard. It will not be possible to do this at once. But in view of the possible major developments which one envisages for the Rustenburg area, this possibility is not excluded. I must say that I shall also welcome the assistance of the hon. member himself, for I know that his approach to and his relations with the mining companies which have interests in that area, are excellent. For that reason I shall appreciate his assistance in that regard. I also want to tell the hon. member that we are definitely encouraging the local refining of platinum ore in that area.

The hon. member also referred to the question of Bantu in the mining industry in the Bantu homeland. I think that if there is one member in this House—along with a few others—to whom this is a vital matter, it is the hon. member for Rustenburg. I want to tell him that I am also appreciative of the way in which he has—with sympathy and understanding but also, along with the other members, with resoluteness in regard to this matter—never lost sight of the fundamental standpoint on policy taken by the Government. If we have the assistance of the leaders in the various constituencies in emphasizing that fundamental standpoints, as is the case here, are of cardinal importance in regard to the policy of separate development in all its consequences, our problems with the other interested parties will also be much smaller. I want to express my personal thanks to members on this side of the House for what they have done in order to leave in the ranks of our miners and of others no doubt about the fact that in regard to fundamental matters the Government cannot allow itself to be guided or dictated to by outside bodies.

Sir, I wonder whether I should reply to the hon. member for Houghton, for she is not here at the moment. Perhaps I should make this one observation only: It is very clear that she has no affection at all for the miner or the Mineworkers’ Union. As far as she is concerned, they are simply “expendable”. I just want to say that the Mineworkers’ Union and every miner in the country should know that, in regard to everything which the hon. member for Houghton stands for, I stand for the opposite.

You do not agree with Harry Oppenheimer either.

Do you agree with the hon. member for Houghton?

That is not of importance; Harry Oppenheimer is not a party. But does the hon. member for Orange Grove agree with the hon. member for Houghton? As I said, the hon. member is not present at the moment, and therefore I am not going to reply to her.

The hon. member for Etosha referred to the White Paper and said that I had indicated that in terms of the provisions of the White Paper we would, this year still or at the latest next year, proceed to making the Pneumoconiosis Act applicable to South-West Africa as well. In this regard I may as well reply at the same time to the points that were made here in regard to pneumoconiosis in general, but let me tell the hon. member first that persons who are working in South-West Africa but who previously worked in the Republic and who are entitled to a pneumoconiosis pension, do receive such pensions, as the hon. member knows. Secondly, we have arrangements to the effect that the examinations of such persons may take place in South-West Africa. Thirdly, the hon. member knows—in fact, he mentioned it—that the incidence of pneumoconiosis is very limited in South-West Africa. In other words, as far as the practical aspects of the matter are concerned, the matter is in hand. Arrangements have been made and there are no major problems. However, as regards the application of the Act to South-West Africa next year, I shall have to disappoint the hon. member, since this will have to be effected in conjunction with the revision and the consolidation of the Pneumoconiosis Act. I have declared myself to be willing—the decision has not been taken finally—to allow such a revision and consolidation to take place. I think that, in the first place, it is necessary that the Act be consolidated, and, in the second place, the undertaking was given by my predecessor, or rather, it was envisaged, that there would be a revision at some stage or other. Hon. members who spoke about this matter, i.e. the hon. members for Virginia, Geduld and various others, asked for a commission of inquiry. My reply is that I think the time has arrived for us to revise and consolidate this legislation. but the question that arises is whether there should be a commission of inquiry. I wonder whether hon. members would not leave this matter in my hands so that the interested parties—the Mineworkers’ Union and the Chambers of Mines—and I may take up the matter; it may be possible for us to keep the whole matter in the family, and in referring to the family, I mean my Department, the Chamber of Mines and the Mineworkers’ Union. I am sure that we shall be able to effect a satisfactory revision and to consolidate it at the same time.

Then the hon. member for Von Brandis raised a few matters in regard to uranium. I think what his plea amounted to, was that in regard to the enrichment plant and the enrichment of uranium private enterprise should obtain a greater share or a share. What his plea amounted to further, was that the Uranium Corporation, as it was envisaged with its board of directors, would possibly not function as effectively as it would, for instance, when private enterprise and interests were brought into it. I cannot agree with the hon. member on that point, and I shall tell him why. This Uranium Corporation will be cast in the same mould as. for instance. Iscor was cast. The operation of the corporation will be exactly the same as that of a private company, where certain things are also submitted to the directors once a month only. But on the staff of the corporation we shall not only have technicians and scientists, but we shall certainly have highly competent economists and other people as well; and if this were to operate in the way Iscor operates at present, I do not foresee any problems in regard to the matter. The hon. member made another point in regard to the erection of the manufacturing plant by saying that we had to divide it into two parts. The first is the pilot plant, and in that regard the Government has already decided, and it is a firm decision, that the finances for the pilot plant are to be provided solely by the Government, and this decision was taken for various reasons, the most important of which is the question of secrecy. As far as the further development is concerned, the hon. the Prime Minister stated very clearly in his announcement that we were prepared to co-operate with non-communist countries which are interested. That is the point. From the nature of the case the hon. member will appreciate how important it is that South Africa should also have partners elsewhere in the world in this ambitious undertaking, apart from the problems in regard to manpower, and this cannot be done completely with the exclusion of private enterprise in South Africa. But I think this is a matter which we shall have to consider in future; it is not relevant at this stage. For that reason I want to give the hon. member this reply, i.e. that private enterprise in South Africa has not been excluded. I think that as we develop along these lines and as this ambitious plant will have to come into being, and especially in the event of a foreign power or non-communist powers taking an interest in it. it may happen that it will also be possible to give private enterprise its rightful share in this matter. However, I want to point out to the hon. member that as far as the eventual marketing of enriched uranium is concerned, one would hardly be able to bypass the existing marketing organization. But these, too. are matters which we have, as yet, not considered in detail, because we do not have the product in our hands yet. Once that is the case, the fullest attention will of course be given to this matter as soon as the corporation’s board of directors has been constituted. I also want to point out to the hon. member that even with the construction of the pilot plant, we have brought the engineering industry and many other industries in South Africa into the matter. The place is not being built by the Atomic Energy Board; it is being built by various South African organizations, including architects as well as engineers. They will handle various aspects of the matter and. specifically. the erection of the apparatus, buildings and everything which is necessary. I think the hon. member may feel quite happy about that.

I replied to the hon. member for Virginia in regard to pneumoconiosis, and made the point that it would not necessarily be a commission of inquiry. The hon. member also raised the question of scleroderma. Of course, this industrial disease is different from pneumoconiosis. I have already appointed a committee of authorities. Professor Oosthuizen, who is my medical adviser, has already paid a visit to Europe, where he investigated the matter thoroughly. Recently I also appointed, on a part-time basis a number of very prominent people to go into this matter. As the hon. member will know, it is still top early at this stage to expect any results. Perhaps I may just say in this regard that the time has now arrived for real attention to be given—in any case, in the course of the next year—to definitely making a start in South Africa with research in connection with all industrial diseases: apart from the research work which we are doing in connection with pneumoconiosis and scleroderma. It seems to me that the pneumoconiosis research unit is the obvious body for perhaps being converted into an institute for industrial medicine. I want to add that we have just put into operation the Medical Research Council, and that a director of industrial medicine is already operating within the framework of the Department of Health. I think that if we brought these things together, we would also comply with the wish which the Mineworkers’ Union expressed at the time when the pneumoconiosis research unit came into being. It was their wish that it had to be developed into an institute for industrial medicine. By doing that we would have made a great deal of progress. I think that I have now replied to all the questions that were raised.

Then there is the question that was raised by the hon. member for Rosettenville, i.e. that of a pension scheme for miners subsequent to their having worked in the mine for 25 years. The hon. member for Geduld also supported this. I must say that this matter has a long history. Hon. members will recall that in the early sixties it also formed part of the negotiations. However, the Mineworkers’ Union eventually decided that it was a matter which should not be mixed with pneumoconiosis compensation. To introduce such a scheme, will in my opinion not benefit the miners to any great extent. I shall tell the House why. At the moment the present pension scheme for miners, which has been in existence since 1949, pays out, in many cases, a fairly small pension to miners. However, it is growing so rapidly that in the minimum cases it has exceeded the R35 of an ordinary social pension. In view of the facts I have before me. it is going to be very difficult for any government or any responsible organization to pass on. out of the taxpayers’ money, to any profession, even if it is the mining profession with all its problems and the great work it is doing for the country, a pension which is bigger than, for instance, the pensions paid to the same miners’ mothers or fathers, who had in another sphere rendered their services to the fatherland in a like manner.

There are the dangers of working in the mines.

The dangers are there, and that is why I have always adopted the attitude that if there is money available for pensions for miners, it should go to those unfortunate persons who contracted an industrial disease such as pneumoconiosis or to the dependants, i.e. the mother and the children, who, as a result of that disease, were placed in a position where they cannot compete with those who are still alive. On the basis of the facts which I have at my disposal at the moment, the Government will have to make a contribution of approximately R33 million merely in order to set this matter going. With those facts I do not want to mislead the miner in South Africa by saying that we shall be able to introduce such a scheme. If hon. members come forward with other proposals and with other ideas as to where the money is to come from, I want to say that my sympathies are definitely with the miner. In that case I shall definitely consider the matter. What I do not want, is that in a debate such as this one unnecessary hopes should be raised, whereas we shall also have to deal with all sorts of other pension categories which also have claims to public money for pensions.

Therefore, the answer is no?

My answer is not a categoric no; it is a practical no, and in view of he facts before me I cannot ask the House to …

In that case money has to be obtained from the Minister of Finance.

The hon. member says we should obtain the money from the hon. the Minister of Finance but what about the other pension groups? I must be realistic about them Can I pay a miner, irrespective of how dangerous his work may be, more out of the pockets of the taxpayers than I would pay his father who had perhaps performed just as dangerous a job in the Police Service:?

The answer is no again.

Of course. That is why I am being practical in regard to the matter, and that is why I am not, under pressure or because of loose talk, going to hold up to the miner of South Africa something which is very difficult to obtain.

I think I have now replied to all the questions. This debate has brought certain matters to the fore, and in conclusion I want to thank members on both sides of the House for the contributions they made here. I think the miner in South Africa may rest assured, with the spirit which has prevailed here in this debate to-day with the understanding which has been in evidence on both sides of our House and with the few matters which we have been able to discuss with the other side of the House, that this Government and I will not leave the miner, and especially the white miner in South Africa, in the lurch. We know his history from the fifties onwards, and he can be confident that his future is safe with us. For that reason we are confident that he will co-operate with us and will not obstruct the implementation of the fundamental policy of the country.

Mr. Chairman, may I have the privilege of the half hour. It is my pleasant duty at the outset to ask the House to join with me in welcoming a new face in the Officials’ Bay. I wish to extend a welcome to Professor Cora Erasmus who is now gracing the Officials’ Bay. For the very first time we have a woman sitting amongst the men. She is going to be here whenever health matters are to be brought up and she is going to make this Vote especially a very popular one.

There are various matters with which I want to deal and firstly I think we should deal with a very important matter which the country is facing to-day and that is the ever-increasing cost of illness. In various ways we have tried to alleviate the cost and one of the measures we brought into the House was an attempt to enlarge the scope of medical aid schemes so that they would include more people under health insurance. I cannot say that this in itself gives us the answer. I want to propose first that we should deal with the question of free hospital accommodation. This is a matter which has been tried in the Transvaal in the past, but it did not have a very successful beginning. There were a lot of objections at the time from the medical profession. Since then we have learned what can be done and we on this side of the House now feel that the time has come and that one of the steps we should take right through all the provinces is to give, from the Central Government, bigger subsidies to the provinces so that they will be able to make hospital accommodation free. By hospital accommodation I would say now that we would give the patient a bed, nursing and food.

Everybody?

Yes, for all. How does this appear on the face of it? It seems a little extreme to do this for everyone. We can do away with the means test. We would do away with the means test and make admission to hospitals dependent on the severity and urgency of the disease. We would give preference to those people who needed immediate attention. We would of course have beds reserved for the less acute cases. Basically that is what we would do. One might say why should a millionaire be privileged in the same way as a man in a lower income group or perhaps even a pauper. Who is going to pay for this scheme? It is going to be the taxpayer. In view of the fact that the rich pay the highest level of taxation, there should be no bar to them coming in. They are contributing the most in taxation. But the hon. the Minister, and most people who have had the privilege of practising medicine, know that the wealthy do not want that kind of accommodation. They want private accommodation and it should be made available to them. Tied up with this very necessary step that we would like to introduce, we would say that we must spread the scope of medical aid schemes. The biggest problem of medical aid schemes is the demands that are made on them through doctors’ fees and the ever-increasing costs of beds in nursing homes and by the ever-increasing cost of drugs. No medical aid scheme can have a fixed contribution. Contributions vary from time to time depending on the rising cost of drugs, beds and medical treatment. If we allow the present situation to go on there will be no ceiling to the contributions. Eventually the medical aid schemes will find a falling off in their membership because of the high contribution demanded from the members. They may even have to go out of business. We have to devise ways whereby we can bring more people into medical aid schemes and, if possible, without increasing costs. How can we do this? I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he consider the following proposal. We should have a national medical aid scheme, as I have advised him to do in years gone by. It should not be run by the State, but contributed to by the State, by employers and by the contributors.

Who would run it?

That is the problem that we should now try to work out. Firstly I want to say that we should try to keep the present medical aid schemes in existence. They should remain as a basis and if we can make a central national medical aid scheme attractive enough, people would go from the smaller schemes to the central scheme. Surely if we can run projects like Iscor and Foscor, great industrial projects, we can also have the same type of council running a medical aid scheme? What is so difficult about it? Can the required personnel not be found to do it? That is the sort of way to do it. We do not want the Government to do it. I do not think the doctors could do it on their own. I do not think the present medical aid structure could undertake to do it. I think that if we had a reliable corporation, they could run the type of medical scheme that I am propagating at the moment. It is something. I think, that cannot fail. It would at least alleviate some of the problems that are facing the people to-day. They cannot carry on as things are at the moment. The cost of beds may become a problem. But the hon. the Minister knows what the cost is to-day. A province may have to spend R60 million to R70 million a year on hospital accommodation. I asked the Minister the other day what it cost the Government, and he told me R18 million.

For beds?

No, R18 million in all. That is what it is costing the Central Government for its own hospitals. R18 million is not a lot of money. I would recommend to the hon. the Minister that he looks through the Auditor-General’s report and sees how much money is wasted over the year by various departments. He will see how little R18 million is really. If it did cost R60 million for a province to run their hospitals, and say for instance that it costs Groote Schuur Hospital R1 million a month, how much does the hon. the Minister think is collected per month from the patients? If they get R50,000 out of the R1 million, it is a lot of money. It probably costs them nearly R40,000 to collect the R50,000. The hon. the Minister knows how difficult it is to collect money from sick people. It is almost impossible at times.

Then the question was put by an hon. member here as to the position of all the people. I take it the hon. member means the Bantu, Coloureds and Indian people. It is very important. How many Bantu pay for their accommodation to-day? A very small proportion pay for their accommodation. Already the Government and the provinces are giving beds virtually free to these people. How many Coloured people pay for a bed to-day? Very few. What difference will it mean in money between giving it free and charging what we charge and being unable to collect the fees? The greatest problem to-day is collecting outstanding accounts. Let us start afresh and try it out. Let us first institute the national medical aid scheme. Let us get a council together that will be prepared to run it. When we have done that, we can reduce the contribution to the medical aid scheme by giving free beds to the sick. But somebocy may ask then, what is the medical aid going to pay for? The medical aid still pays the other expenses. They will pay the doctor’s fee, for paramedical services, drugs, X-rays, and so on. The State, the employer and the contributor will share the contribution to the medical aid fund. The contribution is going to be far less than what is paid at the moment.

Those people who are non-Whites and are employed in jobs which are sufficiently lucrative to be taxed, will automatically pay for the bed costs through their taxation. They will pay less than we do. Naturally they will pay less, but we expect to have to carry some of those burdens. We have always done so in the past. I do not see the position changing now. Those are two things which I feel we should get going as soon as possible. If there are objections, let us discuss them, but let us not merely wipe the idea off the slate immediately, by means of a categorical “no”. I say that if there is one thing that this country has to do immediately, then it is to sit down with experts and work out a scheme such as the one I have outlined here to-day.

In the few minutes left to me I want to go a little further in regard to something I have raised on a previous occasion in this House. This can be tied up with our National Health Scheme. I should like to see the establishment of a Division of Industrial Hygiene. I think the hon. the Minister may have similar thoughts in this regard. I am very much in favour of the hint made by the Minister, namely that we could start by utilizing the present Mines Medical Bureau as a central point. Here again we might find that we need, not the State, not the Mineworkers’ Union nor the doctors to run the scheme, but an autonomous body. A special council may have to be set up to develop industrial hygiene in this country.

Why must it be separate? Why can it not be within the Department of Health?

I shall tell the House why. The reason is that there are so many different departments which will be tied up in this scheme whch I have put forward to-day that it will be impossible for one Minister to undertake its administration on his own. I visualize that the Minister of Mines will be affected because I should like to see pneumoconiosis and other health hazards in the mines covered by this scheme. I want to see the Minister of Labour involved, because he is the Minister responsible for the implementation of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. I want to see the Minister of Social Welfare involved, because he is the Minister who administers social welfare benefits which cover prolonged illness resulting from an industrial hazard of some sort. These are people who will be intimately connected with such a scheme. If the Minister of Health wishes to take the scheme under his wing, he will have to bring in representatives from the other departments. It is because of the possible clashing of ideas, that it will be much better to have an autonomous body, appointed by the Minister of Health, if necessary. I have no objection to that. I do not mind who appoints it, but it should be an autonomous body which is run for the benefit of the worker and the worker’s dependants. That is as far as I can go in the short time at my disposal. I shall be prepared at any time to meet members on both sides of the House to work out a plan we can put forward next year to the Minister. This should not be a party political matter. Both sides of the House should come together to try to work this out and then present it to the people of the country.

Mr. Chairman, like the previous speaker, I do not know whether I should thank the hon. the Minister or Gen. Raymond in connection with the presence of Prof. Erasmus. I just want to say we are pleased to see her here.

The hon. member for Rosettenville raised a matter he had touched upon in this House as long ago as 1962. I think that the hon. the Minister will still remember the occasion and that he will definitely be in the position to reply fully to this matter. I want to deal with the matter in a few sentences. The idea of free hospitalization may be very attractive to some people, and one cannot simply rule out that idea without giving it further consideration, but hon. members will recall that we had that experiment in the Transvaal. We found, however, that people abused those free services. Usually everything which is provied free of charge is abused. The hon. member for Rosettenville, a medical man, will also know what the present position is as regards the societies which offer medical services to the public, such as the aid funds and the benefit funds. In these cases where people obtain free services, such services are abused. The result is that the societies have had to introduce certain fees to prevent people from abusing the services of doctors too much. I am afraid that in this case, too, this tendency will repeat itself.

I should like to bring one aspect to the attention of the hon. the Minister in respect of which a scheme like this may possibly be introduced, and that is with regard to maternity cases. In the Transvaal a non-white woman can be admitted to a hospital and can obtain maternity facilities at a fee of only 50 cents, whereas a white person sometimes has to pay from R100 to R200 for a confinement, although such a person, too, has paid taxes which enable us to provide maternity facilities to the non-Whites at a fee of 50 cents. I wonder whether it is not possible for us to commence providing maternity facilities to Whites at a minimal fee. I shall appreciate it if we can commence with that, and then we may discuss at a later stage the possibilities of extending cheaper hospital services.

We must realize, however, that we have a manpower shortage and a shortage of nurses, particularly in the province from which I come. We have a manpower shortage in the medical field, and I wonder whether we cannot attribute the shortage of medical staff to the divided control of medical services in South Africa. We must face up to the fact that a great deal of progress has been made with regard to the prevention of contagious diseases by means of immunization as a result of which, for example, poliomyelitis, whooping cough, measles, German measles, smallpox and diphtheria have virtually been eradicated. We find very few cases of these diseases to-day. We also have more effective medications for the treatment of tuberculosis and leprosy, as well as for the treatment of psychiatric cases. The result of all these things is that to-day we no longer need hospitals for all cases of contagious diseases, tuberculosis, leprosy and mental diseases. Even in the acute phase mental patients can be treated at an ordinary hospital and only the chronic cases require treatment in a mental institution. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give consideration to combining and rendering from a central point, such as a hospital, all services not rendered by a hospital, for example, preventive services rendered by the Government and local authorities and the services rendered by district surgeons and clinics. This will mean that we shall need less staff for rendering all these services and that it will be possible to make better use of the services of medical men who are in the service of the State. I do not think this is a matter to which the Government has not yet given consideration, because we notice that the introduction of such a central medical service in the Bantu homelands, in which all the services will be rendered from a central point and supplemented by satellite clinics around this central point, is being envisaged. Such central points can be established throughout the country. If we have such a centralized service we shall be able to render better services to the public of the Republic. This will promote a saving of manpower and it will be more effective from the point of view of the medical treatment and the health of our people. Sir, in addition I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether, in view of the shortage of nurses, he will not consult with the Minister of Defence as young girls are now going to be trained for service in the military forces, chiefly to give first aid. Will it not be a good thing if they can undergo the major part of their training in hospitals and go to the camps only for a few months in order to complete the military side of their training? If this can be done, it will assist our hospitals to a very great extent to supplement the shortage of nurses. After the girls have undergone their training of one year, there will be some of them who may be attracted to the medical profession and who will, it is hoped, qualify themselves further as nursing sisters, especially if this year of training may be taken into account as regards the training period of three or three-and-a-half years they have to undergo to qualify as nurses. If we do this, we shall progress much further on the road of finding a solution with regard to the nursing shortage. By way of repetition I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he will not give consideration to investigating the possibility of doing away with the present divided control over the health services in this country, because I feel that if we can unite our health services under one authority we shall be able to render a better service to the public.

The hon. member for Geduld has referred to the manpower shortage and has dealt specifically with the question of the shortage of doctors. He also referred to the fact that there was a shortage of district surgeons. Sir, this is a grave position, where many district surgeon posts are now occupied by locum tenens, simply because it seems that the Department is unable to find full-time encumbents for these posts. Sir, I believe that this is having a detrimental effect on the treatment which some of our senior citizens should by right enjoy through the services of the district surgeons, particularly in outlying areas, and also on the medical treatment given to some of the poorer sections of the community. I would like to suggest that there is one solution to overcome this problem and that is the establishment of a training centre for medical students in Durban or elsewhere in Natal, an ideal location where unique experience could be gained in subtropical diseases, while at the same time offering to the students in Natal the opportunity of studying in their own province, an opportunity which they do not have at the moment. They are 1,000 miles away from Cape Town and 400 miles away from the Transvaal. I commend this thought to the hon. the Minister.

Sir, I want to ask the hon. the Minister one question in regard to the Estimates. It would appear from the Estimates that the post of Commissioner for Mental Health and other senior and important posts have been done away with; there is no mention of any salaries in so far as these six posts are concerned. I trust that the hon. the Minister will give us some explanation in that respect.

Then, Sir, I want to deal with the question of cancer and the growing concern on this score in the minds of members of the public and also in the minds of some members of the medical profession. I want first to refer to some of the aspects of the present situation. Let us take the position as far as the Department of Health is concerned. We find that this Department contributes to the National Cancer Association of South Africa R200 per annum. This is an amount which, as far as I know, has remained constant since 1963. It is the smallest single item in the Estimates for the Department of Health. I know that an unspecified amount is also provided by the Department of Health for medical research in respect of cancer, but I want to compare the position of another Government Department in so far as this aspect is concerned. Take the Department of Finance. This Department receives from a source which is an acknowledged cause of cancer, an estimated R91.5 million this year. This is in respect of what the Department of Finance expects to receive in customs and excise on cigarettes and cigarette tobacco only, R91.5 million! This estimate is 50 per cent more than the amount which was estimated in the 1965-’66 Estimates.

Now we come back to the National Council for Cancer and we find that in the last year for which figures are available, R109,000 was spent on cancer research. This represents roughly 1 per cent of the amount which the Department of Finance gathers into its coffers in the form of customs and excise on the sale of cigarettes and cigarette tobacco. In addition to the research which is encouraged and initiated by this Association, we have welfare work being carried out; we have assistance to cancer patients; interim and terminal homes for cancer sufferers, and electro-larynx devices. This wonderful work is made possible through R200 per annum from the Department of Health, contributions in the form of grants-in-aid from various local authorities and then bequests and donations and the generosity of the public. I want to quote briefly from the latest report of the National Cancer Association, from the message of the president, Dr. Lewis S. Robertson. This is what he said—

The report refers to responsibility and in this respect, the hon. the Minister has a particular responsibility because he is the honorary president of this particular Association, the patron of which is the State President himself. So my plea to the Minister this afternoon is to review the State’s support of the Association and participation in the whole matter of cancer, and also to accept my appeal which I addressed to him in a letter on 29th June, when I asked whether he would consider and instruct the Department of Health to investigate the position in regard to the advertising and promotion of sales of cigarettes. I am satisfied from representations that have been made to me by responsible people that cigarette smoking is to a large extent a cause of lung cancer. But what is also of growing importance and concern is the fact that cancer of the bladder has now been established to be due also in some measure to cigarette smoking. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that if nothing is done in this respect, I conclude that he is condoning the present position. Then the State itself must accept the responsibility to a certain extent for the high incidence of lung cancer. I know that it is a difficult question. I also know that other factors are involved. But are we in this country taking a serious view of the problem as has been taken in other countries? In 1965 in Great Britain a ban was placed on television advertising of cigarettes. I noticed that on the 1st July, 1969, the B.B.C. Publications Board banned the advertisement of cigarettes in its publications. I am told that the amount spent on that particular section of advertising alone, was R½ million per year. The B.B.C. in its wisdom and in its awareness of the problem decided that it was necessary to enforce this ban.

Then, Sir, in the short time left to me, I want to discuss with the hon. the Minister the question of the findings of the committee of inquiry into the safeguarding of man against poisons. There was a Press release which was issued on the 5th March, which indicated that the report of the committee was to be made available. The committee sat for five years and cost the taxpayer R29,000 for its advice. This was good advice prepared by experts after due consideration of the problem. The committee made certain recommendations in its report which will be available initially in Afrikaans and subsequently in English to interested parties. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, will pardon me if I do not follow up on what he said in his argument. He made a very heart-stirring plea for further donations to the National Cancer Association. We could probably associate ourselves with this. I find it a pity, however, that in his plea the hon. member also levelled a reproach at the hon. the Minister in this sense that he mentioned that if the Minister could not find it possible to make generous contributions to the funds of the National Cancer Association, he would have to accept that the Minister condoned the present situation in regard to cancer. I think that was an unfair demand to make.

I want to draw the attention of the House to the increasing and alarming misuse of methylated spirits, seen from the point of view of national health. Methylated spirits, as it is known in the trade, consists generally of a mixture of ethyl-alcohol, to which has been added approximately 9.5 per cent wood alcohol or methanol or methyl-alcohol, plus .5 per cent pyridine, plus a quantity of petroleum oil, plus colouring matter to give methylated spirits its distinctive colour. The characteristic and offensive smell and taste of ordinary methylated spirits, derives from the methanol (methyl-alcohol) content added to it. We must draw a distinction between ethyl-alcohol, which is the normal alcohol we find in alcoholic drinks, and methyl-alcohol which is another form of alcohol. Methyl-alcohol is a very poisonous form of alcohol. It is calculated that a deadly dose varies between approximately 100 and 200 cubic centimetres. It is clear thus that the toxic content of ordinary methylated spirits is considerably high. The toxic effect of methylated spirits is more or less the same as that of methyl-alcohol. It also induces an ordinary alcoholic intoxication such as the inebriation which is caused by ordinary alcohol.

We find that the onset of the symptoms of inebriation from methyl-alcohol takes much longer to appear than with ordinary ethylalcohol. It is therefore clear that a mixture of the two kinds of alcohol displays this phenomenon: You have the relatively rapid effect of the ethyl-alcohol, plus the delayed effect of methyl-alcohol, combined in one drink. This, then, manifests itself in a condition of inebriation which lasts much longer than that of the normal form. Methyl-alcohol poisoning also leads to sight defects and permanent blindness. This can be the result of its abuse. In addition the excessive use of methyl-alcohol leads to an acute form of acidosis, a very deep coma, and eventually death due to asphyxiation. It is therefore very clear that in methylated spirits we have a very potent poison. We now find that this product, i.e. methylated spirits is available on the market at approximately 25 cents per bottle. It is therefore a very cheap form of alcohol which is readily available. There is probably a measure of control over its sale in our ordinary shops, but I want to go so far as to say that it is so minimal that any person who wishes to acquire methylated spirits is able to do so; even children of the age of ten or twelve years.

Because it is so readily available, and because it is such a potent form of alcohol, we find that its use is beginning to assume alarming proportions, particularly among our Coloured population. This is happening particularly among the pensioners in our Coloured population. I have been told that they filter methylated spirits through bread and in that way they remove the colour of the spirit and also to a large extent the offensive taste. The filtrate is then mixed with Coca Cola or other kinds of cool drink, and this mixture is then downed. The use of this drink gives rise to inebriation, as I have already mentioned. I have pointed out the toxic effect of this form of alcohol, but strangely enough we find in practice that a resistance has apparently been built un among the Coloureds to the toxic effect of methylated spirits as a result of its prolonged use. They begin with small amounts which do not have such a seriously toxic effect on them. They drink ever-increasing quantities and it seems that they then build up a resistance to the toxic effect, which I have just described. If a person gets drunk on methylated spirits it gives him the dubious advantage that he immediately begins to become intoxicated as a result of the ethyl-alcohol, and that he remains intoxicated for a much longer period as a result of the methyl-alcohol content of the methylated spirits. This has the additional advantage to him that when he sobers up and drinks tea or water, he becomes inebriated all over again. This is therefore a very cheap way of becoming inebriated, and a very cheap way of remaining inebriated for a long time.

As I said, this evil of the misuse of methyldated spirits is to an increasing extent occurring in my constituency among the Coloured population. Not only does it lead to a spiritual and moral decay, which is disturbing to witness, and not only does it result in tremendous social problems for us, but also, seen from the national health point of view, it is definitely an evil because the resistance of these people becomes terribly low. It affects their livers and they suffer from malnutrition because every penny they can spare they use to purchase this methylated spirits and while they are inebriated they do not eat enough. In fact, they do not eat at all and this leads to a terrible condition of malnutrition. Not only does this occur among the older Coloureds. This phenomenon is now beginning to appear among the young Coloured youth between the ages of ten and twelve. These people simply fall very easy prey to tuberculosis and other contagious diseases. I realize only too well that to combat this evil is most certainly not a simple problem. I feel, however, that steps must be taken in this respect. There must at least be intensified control measures for the sale and availability of methylated spirits. A second possibility which one almost hesitates to mention, but in view of the danger which threatens and the effect which it has on these people, I think that one ought to consider adding an emetic to methylated spirits so that when it is drunk it is immediately vomited up again. Unfortunately the withdrawal of this commodity from the market cannot be considered because it has a very general and essential domestic use. I feel however that this peoblem is serious enough to indicate that an investigation of further control measures and other physical measures which can be taken to make this drink less readily available, and when it is available, to ensure that it cannot as readily be drunk as the position is at present, should be instituted.

In the short time at my disposal I just want to touch on another matter, namely the question of the sale of patent medicines, in particular by general dealers. From the beginning of 1970 our pharmacists have been trained according to a new four year academic course which we adopted. Then follows an additional year of internship with a pharmacist. The introduction and the extension of this academic course is necessary to give the pharmacist the necessary background so as to keep pace with the latest developments in the field of medicines and the supply of medicines. Then too, our training compares favourably with the best in the Western world. But these people, although they have undergone academic training and are under the control of the Medical Practitioners, Dentists and Pharmacists Act do not enjoy any professional protection. All shops can sell aspirins, and numerous other remedies which I do not have time to enumerate now. I want to make an appeal that consideration should be given here to introducing control so that these ordinary patent medicines are not so readily available from general dealers. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. the Minister will respond to the points raised by the hon. member for Cradock and that he will not expect me to follow him in his arguments. I would, however, like to make one comment. The sale of these medicines in other than chemist shops to which the hon. member for Cradock referred has had the effect of keeping them within reasonable price levels. One would not like to see any steps taken which might result in an increase in the cost of these remedies to the general public.

I want to associate myself particularly with the appeal made by the hon. member for Rosettenville in regard to the facing up to the problem of the cost of illness. I am sure that if there is one fact which is very real nowadays it is the constant fear of all sections of the community of the possibility of a serious illness with the consequent costs, not only the direct costs of the illness, but also the loss of earnings, and so on, which accompanies illness on so many occasions. It is an interesting fact that this problem is becoming more and more acute as a result of the success of medical research which has been undertaken over the years in this country and elsewhere. Medical research has resulted in the evolving of spectacular medical procedures in the field of curative medicines, in advances in the skill of surgeons and the advances made wth the treatment of certain serious diseases. I am now thinking, for example, of the treatment of kidney diseases not only by renal dicilysis but also by kidney transplants. One also thinks of the extent to which surgery has advanced in the field of open heart surgery in providing curative medicine. But these procedures are prohibitively expensive so far as the general public is concerned. If one adds to these considerations the cost of pharmaceuticals, one is driven to the conclusion that the problem is an urgent one that needs attention, namely to deal with the provision of these facilities for all sections of the community.

Mention has been made of the cost of hospitalization. The hon. member for Rosettenville mentioned, for instance, that the running of Groote Schuur Hospital is amounting to R120,300 per annum. That is only administrative cost without capital expenditure. Included in that sum is an amount of R1,600,000 for pharmaceuticals that are consumed by the patients in that hospital, in other words, 13.4 per cent of the total cost of that hospital service. I do therefore hope that the hon. the Minister will give attention to the plea which has been made by the hon. member for Rosettenville.

That brings us to another point which I hope the hon. the Minister will be good enough to elaborate upon to this Committee this afternoon. That is what is happening in regard to medical services for the non-Whites. One finds in the Estimates, for instance, which are before us, when it comes to hospitals for the Bantu areas, that there is merely a blank space, a small “a” and a footnote which says that the S.A. Bantu Trust will pay. That is a very easy way of doing it, but I understand that although the responsibilities have been passed to the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, he has passed the administrative responsibilities back to the Department of Health. Or is it to be the responsibility of the provinces? What is the policy that is being adopted? One fears that, unless there is some policy and some direct attention to the provision of these many hospital services for the Bantu homelands, there are grave dangers that there might well be a breakdown in the health services, with the consequent epidemics which might well spill over throughout the country. There is further the problem of the health services for the Bantu who are not in the Bantu homelands and never will be, those who are in the white areas.

I hope the hon. the Minister will indicate to us what is Government policy in regard to this matter; because it seems that it is something left in the air very much at the present moment. I want to say just how impressed one has been by the dedication one has found by the medical practitioners who are working in mission hospitals in the Bantu homelands. I recently visited Vendaland and had the occasion of visiting a mission hospital there, and saw the dedication and the amount of work that is being done by one medical practitioner in a hospital which required him to be everything, from a physician and a neurologist to a surgeon in all aspects of medical work. He was rather worried and anxious that he was unable to get medical support to assist him in that particular work. I hope that the hon. the Minister will be good enough to deal with that question.

In the time left I now want to deal with another matter which I do not think has received the urgent attention which it deserves from the hon. the Minister. I refer here to the report of the Commission on Nursing. When I asked the hon. the Minister on 24th July about a report on the commission into the training and conditions of service of nurses, he gave me the facetious reply that there was no such commission. The commission might have been termed something different, strictly speaking, but it certainly had as its object to inquire into the conditions of nursing, as well as the conditions of service and the remuneration of nurses. But there is one matter I cannot understand. This Minister should know that every province in this country has been anxiously awaiting this report since 1964, and he and his Department have been sitting on it for 12 months without referring it to the provinces. I happened to be a member of the co-ordinating council at the time. The provinces themselves asked for this problem to be tackled in 1964 and the hon. the Minister’s predecessor then appointed this commission.

I do not think this is giving the serious attention to the problem of the provincial hospitals which they deserve. After all, it is the Government and this Minister who say what the provinces can pay and what they cannot pay. The difficulties which they have in dealing with their nursing problems are laid at the door, to a very great extent, of this Department. So I do not know why the Minister should have regarded it necessary to keep this report from the provinces for the period of 12 months, as he indicated to me eventually in reply to a question, after receiving it from the commission.

The dissatisfaction in regard to salary scales cannot be overemphasized. The problems which are being caused by the continually growing gap between salary scales of white and non-white nurses in South Africa are building up in such a way that they may well become impossible to solve. A qualified Coloured nurse at the present moment is paid less than a white student nurse straight out of school. What is more, a qualified Coloured nursing sister who has received the same training and has passed the same exams as white nurses have to pass, and who has received every increment to which she is entitled, receives less than a white student nurse in her third year of training, even though she has been working as a qualified sister for no less than 11 years. No wonder these people are leaving our country. No wonder they are seeking jobs elsewhere. They are being given important jobs in hospitals in other parts of the world. They are being welcomed into those hospitals because of their qualifications and their ability. Even if we forget the need for paying these people a satisfactory salary and if we look at the matter from the point of view of our own selfish needs, we must still realize that we need every one of these qualified nurses to remain in South Africa and serve their own people, if not other people, in our hospitals.

We have this problem in the nursing profession, but it is not being tackled and the solution has not been found. Over a period of 12 years an investigation has shown that the wastage among student nurses of all races during their period of training amounts to 51 per cent. Only 49 per cent complete their training. When it comes to mental nurses, the wastage during training has been found to be as high as 78 per cent. Seventy-eight per cent of these student nurses give up nursing before their training period has been completed. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in 1960 a commission was appointed by the Government to collect information, call for papers and report on the high cost of medicines and medical services. This commission reported in 1962, and for a time the necessary attention was given to this matter. However, I should like to say a few words this afternoon about the non-implementation of the recommendations of the commission. I want to emphasize at the very outset what was said on a previous occasion by the hon. member for Rosettenville, i.e. that in our modern times illness had in fact become a luxury, and that people who became old and sickly had virtually lost the means to a livelihood. I should like to confine myself in particular to that group of people who are probably dear to all of us on both sides of the House. These are our elderly people, our invalids who in the declining years of their lives have to rely on the favours of other people and who, particularly with the high cost of medicine and medical services, are finding it almost impossible to make a proper livelihood.

It has become commonplace to say that in recent years the percentage of elderly people has increased. To mention an example, it has been calculated that in 1911 2.4 per cent of the population was older than 65. As a result of changing circumstances, such as improved medical services, etc., that percentage has increased over the years. In 1960 it was calculated that 7 per cent of the population was above 65 years of age and that 4 per cent was older than 70. This tendency is continuing apace. Some time or other some of our less well-to-do people find themselves in a position where they have become less well-to-do elderly people. I want to join the hon. member for Green Point in paying tribute to the work which is being done, not only in mission hospitals, but also at other places, by medical practitioners, district surgeons and mission hospital doctors. These people have rendered this service in an excellent manner to all our population groups.

But I think it is time this problem was seen as a problem on its own, and not in conjunction with the general problem of the duplication of health services as we find it in the Republic of South Africa. This is a problem which deserves attention in itself. On occasion the late Mr. Odendaal, the former Administrator of the Transvaal, said the following when he was discussing the care of these elderly people—

Mr. Chairman, if there is one group of people who are being sorely afflicted by the continually increasing cost of medicine and of medical services, then it is our elderly and our needy people.

I do not want to repeat the same old story by describing the duplication of services we have in our country, and the difficulties which go hand-in-hand with this. I do however want to point out in passing that as a result of this system of divided health services that group for whom we ought to have most sympathy, is the most sorely afflicted. I want to mention an example of this. If a pensioner has become so seriously ill hat hospitalization is needed, he can be sent to hospital by a district surgeon. But as soon as this patient arrives at the hospital, it is a different doctor who has to take over his case. Then it is a doctor attached to the hospital who has to treat this person. Then the person finds that he is sent from one doctor to another. I know, not as a medical practitioner, but as patient, how the confidence of people is lost once they are sent from one doctor to another. But if such an elderly or needy person recovers and is discharged from hospital, the long story of duplication of services and costs incurred and sometimes even humiliation which has to be suffered, begins again. Then such a patient has to return to his district surgeon and ask for medicine there. I must admit that such medicines are readily supplied. But I want to say in passing, too, that district surgeons are hesitant about prescribing the best medicines, because they do not want to incur those heavy expenses for the State. For that reason, so I have been informed, the cheaper remedies are prescribed rather than to prescribe those remedies which are used by other people and for which they pay. Consequently it is expected of such a patient, should he take ill again, to make use of the out-patients service. It is expected of him to sit waiting at a hospital, sometimes for hours, not as a result of negligence on the part of the staff, but as a result of the fact that he is in fact as the Administrator of the Transvaal put it: A person living in no man’s land. I have personal experience of people having to wait for two, three or four hours at the out-patients sections of hospitals and wait for the arrival of a doctor so that he can give them a prescription which then makes it possible to obtain the medicine free of charge from the hospital.

I just want to advocate that shortly, when the reports of the Borckenhagen Committee and the Schumann Commission are dealt with one of these days by the Government, this question of health services for our elderly and needy people should receive serious attention from our authorities.

In pursuance of this, I make no excuse when I say that in this country where we are applying a policy of granting each individual his rights, our bounden obligation to supply these services to the needy in a way in which they can appreciate and understand, is also an obligation we have towards the non-white population. For that reason I want to praise the work of the district surgeons in particular. It is unfortunately the case that non-white patients because they are non-paying patients, are almost exclusively referred to district surgeons. Those district surgeons not only have the task of surgeon but they have the task of a civilizer; they have the task of conveying to the non-Whites the goodwill of the Whites in South Africa, and proving it to them through deeds. They have the task of further implementing this policy which has over the years been implemented by our Government with so much success, and are bringing it home to the non-Whites that the Whites accept their role of guardianship and that they want to give of their very best to the underprivileged of other groups. Sir, I want to praise the work being done by district surgeons in this connection, and not only the work of district surgeons, but also that of district nurses. In conclusion I want to advocate that district surgeons and district nurses should be remunerated in such a way that it will be made possible for them to do the work, which they have to do with dedication and under difficult circumstances, more efficiently. I want to advocate an expansion in particular of district nursing services so that services such as the giving of injections, etc., at home can be supplied to the aged who have to remain at home and who cannot come to the hospitals and consulting rooms.

Sir, we on this side of the House are in full accord with the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Witbank. Like him I too believe that our old people are a section of our community who deserve the fullest consideration not only from each one of us but also from ali our Government and provincial Departments.

Sir, I want to discuss another section of our community with the hon. the Minister. I want to discuss the problem of malnutrition as it perhaps concerns our younger people. Malnutrition affects our community in two ways. Because many people, largely due to poverty, are unable to obtain the food they need, they find themselves undernourished and very often they eventually have to find their way to hospitals for treatment. Malnutrition secondly has a very real and neutralizing effect on the value of education to many of the young people who are attending school to-day. Dealing with the first, I want to say that tuberculosis is one of the most costly diseases with which we have to contend in South Africa to-day. Something like R15 million is being set aside on the Minister’s Vote for fighting tuberculosis. It is right that this should be so; I am not quarrelling with that. I believe that this is a disease that we should fight with all the resources available to us, but at the same time I think we must accept that tuberculosis is a disease which in many cases is brought on by malnutrition.

I read here from a cutting that the Cape Divisional Council spent R900,000 fighting tuberculosis last year. Dr. F. K. Mitchell, the medical officer of health, said at the annual meeting of the Cape Western Area Committee of the Christmas Stamp Fund in Cape Town that tuberculosis, which was basically a socio-economic disease, was a disease of the slums and of the undernourished. This is the point I want to emphasize. I realize that this is not the only cause of tuberculosis. People who work in mines and in other difficult conditions contract the disease for other reasons, but undernourishment is certainly a big contributory cause of tuberculosis. In highlighting this matter I am particularly conscious of the fact that during this Session of Parliament in our agricultural debates we discussed the problems of agriculture and one could not but be deeply concerned by the fact that one of the most serious problems of agriculture is over-production of agricultural products. Here we are confronted with the position that undernourishment is retarding the education of our children and it is also causing the other diseases I mentioned while at the same time we are living in a country with vast agricultural surpluses. You will remember, Sir, that we had a debate here on the Egg Control Bill, which went on for many long hours. The main problem which gave rise to that Bill was because we have a very considerable egg surplus and exactly the same situation applies to the milk industry. One of its most serious problems is over-production. There are also surpluses of various types of fruit from time to time. On the question of milk surpluses it is quite astonishing to read that during 1968-’69 in Johannesburg 650,000 gallons of milk were thrown away in 99 days; in Pretoria 435,000 gallons were thrown away in four days; in Bloemfontein 51,000 gallons in 90 days, and in Cape Town almost 2 million gallons of skimmed milk were thrown away in 400 days. I just raise this point because we have these surpluses which if properly used can overcome the problem of malnutrition which is very prevalent in our country. If you take the position in Europe, in Ireland the average person drinks 45 gallons of milk a year. In Britain it is 31 gallons, and in the United States 26 gallons per capita per annum. But the astonishing thing about these figures is that we in South Africa only drink 14.5 gallons, in spite of the fact that we are throwing thousands of gallons of milk away every day.

I do not want to try to impress the hon. the Minister with the effects of malnutrition because he is a medical man and I am a layman. He knows far better than I do what the bad effects of undernourishment are. But as a layman I certainly know, talking about milk as a farmer, that if I do not feed my calves properly they will never grow up to be decent milk cows, and I believe exactly the same principle applies to humans. If they are undernourished as children they never grow up into people who can play their full role in society. It is for this reason that I think this matter is of very great importance. I also raised this matter in the agricultural debate. I believe that this hon. Minister together with the hon. the Minister of Social Welfare and Pensions and the Minister of Agriculture owe it to South Africa to get together to form some kind or organization that can co-ordinate properly and effectively these agricultural surplus products to which I have been referring.

Bantu Administration.

The Department of Bantu Administration may well be included. I am not pleading that this should be an entirely free scheme. We are fortunate in South Africa to-day to have many school-feeding schemes throughout the country. We have them in all the big cities. These schemes are collecting money and are feeding the less privileged children at the schools. I think this venue is a very good place to co-ordinate this type of feeding scheme. The organizations are there. But I can assure you that many of them are struggling to keep going on account of a lack of funds. I think it will be a very poor day if we allow these school feeding organizations to go under as a result of a lack of financial support and they no longer will be in a position to perform the valuable work which they are doing for the country. I believe that the hon. the Minister should go into this matter. I know it is not the Government’s policy to have these feeding schemes. I believe the Government changed the policy in 1953. We on this side of the House believe that it is something the Government should take another look at. I believe there was trouble in times gone by. There were chaotic conditions in regard to these schoolfeeding schemes. They were not well organized. I however believe the position is quite different to-day. [Time expired.]

I hope the hon. member for Walmer will not mind if I do not follow him in my speech. I have a particular subject to deal with, namely the so-called population explosion of the world, which concerns everybody as it is a worldwide phenomenon. It has most important sociological, political and economic implications. Also here in South Africa I think it concerns us especially in view of our own peculiar population make-up. I should like to quote William P. Bundy as reported in the Newsweek magazine., This is what he said—

Population growth is the major villian in developing countries in their efforts to improve the life of their people.

For example, if the economic growth rate of a particular country is to the order of say 5 per cent and the population growth 3 per cent, the average gain as far as the individual is concerned, is only 2 per cent. Actually in the United States of America with an average growth rate of 5 per cent the gain is only 3.5 per cent. That is the position in spite of the fact that since 1964 the population growth rate in America has declined from 1.5 per cent to .8 per cent. The United States of America has in fact increased the amount of their national budget from 4 million dollars to over 100 million dollars as far as family planning is concerned. Japan, for instance, has by various means shown that it is possible to curtail any excessive population growth. In Japan the position has reached an almost static situation.

In view of the so-called manpower shortage in South Africa, one would be inclined to say that this problem does not apply to South Africa. However, we realize that once a scheme of this nature is put into effect, one can only verify the results in a matter of about 20 to 30 years. Therefore, I am of the opinion that this matter is certainly serious. Now, what are the problems as far as overpopulation is concerned? Primarily it is a question of whether food production and the water utilization can keep up the pace with the population growth. The first known scare on this matter came when the Reverend Thomas R. Matthus issued a publication in 1798. Although his calculations were wrong at that time—for example he used the ratio of 1:2:4:8 as far as the population increase is concerned and the ratio of 1:2:3:4 as far as food production is concerned—he certainly drew attention to this very important subject. I am not going to go into the details of all this and all its factors, but raising the standards of living which I have mentioned, in regard to the overcrowding resulting from over-population, the provision of the infrastructure, housing, the future of our immigration policy, the future of our Bantustans, the future of education and other economic factors. certainly concern us. However, I am appealing to the Government to-day and to the Opposition to give this problem very serious consideration. I also wish to direct a special appeal to the Bantu nations of South Africa. However, I want to make it clear that I am looking at this problem merely from an economic and a social point of view, in spite of the fact that some people would like to put a political angle on my argument. One cannot get away from the fact that it is the Bantu in South Africa who will suffer most if we have over-population, congestion, lack of food, lack of medical services and an inability to raise the standard of living in South Africa. I have worked amongst the Bantu people for many years as a district surgeon, I have created no less than 13 clinics over a wide area in the Bantu areas and I have served on various child welfare and social welfare organizations on their behalf. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I know what I am talking about when I say that in spite of the wonderful work which the Minister and his Department are doing one cannot get away from the fact that there are certain areas where malnutrition and kwashiorkor occur in an endemic proportion. This happens in spite of the hon. the Minister and his Department’s feeding schemes, family planning clinics, which are in existence, immunization and a number of other health services. This is entirely as a result of overpopulation and of a low standard of living. The hon. member for Houghton would most probably say that we must pay them more. I want to quote Abraham Lincoln who once said: “You cannot help a man permanently by doing for him what he should do for himself.” Therefore the solution must be sought along these lines. The population growth has been controlled effectively in other countries through education, a change in the attitude of the people through family planning, the changing of the abortion laws and also by limiting it by natural means. I want to indicate that we in South Africa are primarily concerned with education and family planning. In spite of what I have just said, and what I have said earlier on, I just want to say a few words about the last aspect, i.e. control through natural means. I think this subject needs very close scrutiny and research.

Robert Ardrey said that all animals, save man, had learnt to curtail the population at a point of strain far short of the exhaustion of key resources. I believe that man will be no exception to this rule. It is interesting to note what Professor V. C. Edwards of Aberdeen has established, namely that the population of certain seabirds is directly proportional to the amount and concentration of plankton in a given area. It is also a fact that where there is over-population of animals in nature there is a natural inhibition of sexual behaviour. There are many examples in nature where there is this natural ability to control population increase. I therefore say that this subject needs very careful research in future. We cannot adopt an attitude of “wait and see”. This is rather the attitude one would expect of the United Party. They usually adopt this attitude of “wait and see”. I feel that something must be done, and done urgently. I hope that the census figures will not show really how urgent this matter is. It could be an awe-inspiring situation.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Newcastle has dealt with a delicate subject, namely the question of family planning, in other words birth control, and the question of family planning services. It is interesting to note that in the Estimates there is an increase from R170,000, on page 189 of the Estimates, to R290,000 as far as family planning services are concerned. I would also like to say to the hon. member for Newcastle that I think it was quite unnecessary for him to try to bring in a policital aspect here in regard to the so-called “wait and see” policy of the United Party. If one wants to use this particular question of family planning and the population explosion for political purposes, we can have a very interesting political debate indeed. But it would certainly not be one which would redound to the benefit of this House, because this is a matter which should obviously not be dealt with on a political basis. We know very well how the political opponents of South Africa would readily attack South Africa on every flank if it is to try and curtail the natural increase in the population of the non-white section of this community. This can develop into a very serious political issue facing South Africa from the outside world. Surely we do not want to see this aspect, i.e. the political aspect, brought into the debate on a subject such as this.

I do not want to follow the arguments of the hon. member for Newcastle any further. We know that many organizations who assist with family planning have as their motto “A planned family is a happy family” and there is no doubt about it that there is a need in South Africa for family planning services. It would appear from the Estimates that the hon. the Minister has increased the expenditure under this head considerably as opposed to the figures for the past financial year.

I want to deal with a subject which has received a good deal of publicity in recent times, namely the question of the protection of the environment and, more particularly, the question of air pollution. If we look at the Estimates that are before us we see that on page 186, under the heading “Salaries”, there is an amount of R27,000 for salaries in regard to the posts concerning the Air Pollution Control Act of 1965. This Act was passed by this House in its wisdom in an effort to tackle this very serious problem which is facing many countries in the world to-day. In trying to assess what is done by the Government and the hon. the Minister in regard to air pollution, it would appear that there is a good deal still to be done and that there should be more expeditious treatment of this problem. The provisions of the Air Pollution Control Act of 1965 should be put into effect. Also in the Estimates, on page 187. under the heading “Miscellaneous Expenses”, there is a payment to the C.S.I.R. for services rendered in connection with research regarding atmospheric pollution control, a payment which remained the same as that of the previous financial year, namely R15,000. This means that in terms of the Vote now before us, as far as air pollution control is concerned, there is a sum of only R42-000 to be voted by this Committee for the particular problem. This problem of air pollution is one which was considered by a Select Committee. Thereafter we had legislation introduced in the House in an effort to combat this growing problem. We know that there is an awareness among industrialists and local authorities of the problem that faces them as far as air pollution is concerned. There are certain areas in South Africa which perhaps are more adversely affected than others. As far as the Durban area and part of the Natal coast are concerned, there is evidence on any winter morning that this is a particularly grave problem that is facing us in South Africa, certainly in some parts of the country. During June of this year, the University of Natal took certain photographs on different mornings where temperature inversion conditions prevailed which brought about an aggravation of this problem of air pollution. It showed on a particular morning when the temperature inversion conditions existed, that at ground level the temperature was 9.6 degrees Centigrade, while at 160 metres the temperature was 19.6 degrees Centigrade. Photographs taken of one micron of smog carbon which had been magnified, certainly caused a great deal of consternation among the people when they saw in what state the air had become polluted in that particular area on that particular day. This is occuring in an increasing degree in other parts of South Africa. If we look at the conditions and the industrialization in South Africa, this position can only become more and more acute. If one looks at the position in Durban, one finds that there are certain climatic conditions which aggravate this problem, particularly the area that I represent, which has a large power station, belching smoke into the atmosphere 24 hours a day. There are railway shunting marshalling yards, and many of the steam locomotives add further to the smog conditions. There are also tugs in the harbour area which further aggravate the question of pollution. There are factories as well in the area, many of which are guilty of air pollution. In addition to this, there are arterial roads which carry a vast quantity of traffic, which also adds to the problem and aggravates the situation. Indeed, the number of motor vehicles that are being used to-day on the roads of South Africa, is increasing at a tremendous rate. In some countries steps have been taken, for instance in the United States and the United Kingdom, to try to bring about control of the emission of gas from these motor vehicles. Incidentally, the hon. Minister of Community Development, who unfortunately has just gone out, attended a conference that was held last month at Milner Park. TVs conference had as its theme “Your environment and you”. The hon. the Minister of Community Development also indicated the gravity of the problem and the fact that according to the C.S.I.R., the number of vehicles in South Africa is increasing at a tremendous rate. At about 1975 there will be over 2 million motor vehicles in South Africa, and by 1990 4 million. This is a problem which undoubtedly is growing in magnitude. Indeed, at this particular conference, a paper that was presented by a Professor T. D. Tyson, of the Department of Geography at the Witwatersrand University, mentioned how this problem was being tackled and the manner in which it was being tackled in other parts of the world. He also indicated that in New York and in Tokyo special remedial steps had to be taken to reduce the quantity of carbon monoxide in the atmosphere only some weeks ago; this had to be reduced because of the hazard to health in these large cities.

We know that the C.S.I.R. has carried out certain research work and has a certain monitoring network in South Africa to try and gauge the gravity of this problem. However, Sir, there is no doubt about it that it is an increasing problem. I believe that Professor Tyson made a very worthwhile suggestion in the presentation of the paper at this conference to which the hon. the Minister should give his attention. He recommended that the need for a national co-ordination of the scientific efforts with regard to this particular problem should receive the attention of the hon. the Minister, as the responsible Minister particularly as far as air pollution control is concerned. He believes that a co-ordinating national council for environmental research should be established, which would have certain aims. These aims would be to monitor the quality of the environment, to promote and co-ordinate research on the despliation of the environment, to advise the Government on policies concerning man’s interaction with the environment and to promote public awareness of the importance of environmental problems. I believe that these are important proposals in an effort that is being made by many interested persons by means of informing organizations and the holding of conferences to bring about the awareness which is so necessary to face this problem. A suggestion is here made with regard to the co-ordination of research but before the Committee at the moment, is an item of R15,000 for the C.S.I.R. for research into this particular problem. In my opinion this research requires far more than the present provision we have before us. I do hope that the hon. the Minister will give his urgent attention to bring about a crash programme so that this problem can be tackled in time in order to curb the deteriorating condition developing in most of our cities. [Time expired.]

The hon. member who has just sat down discussed a very important matter, i.e. the problem of air pollution. I want to say that as far as the broad principle is concerned, there cannot be any difference of opinion, but with regard to air pollution one should also have regard to the fact that it is actually the price we have to pay for our technological development and for what arises from that development. I am satisfied that the State is doing enough for combatting this problem as expeditionsly as possible. It is a pity, however, that the United Party, or at least some of its members, always tries to make politics of matters discussed in an important debate like this. I want to refer to the hon. member for Rosettenville in particular, who discussed free hospitalization earlier on to-day. I know that the Chairman will not allow us to discuss this matter, but I want to say that that hon. member tried to make a speech in this House with an eye on the provincial elections. One finds that a great pity. As far as free hospitalization is concerned, I want to say that we do not believe in following the broad idea of socialism. We believe that assistance should be given where assistance is required. I may rightly speak of the Transvaal, and I have had numerous cases on whose behalf I have had to make representations. Each time that province has been prepared to write off the hospital account. I think this is the correct standpoint, i.e. to give assistance where assistance is required.

I want to refer also to two aspects raised by the hon. member for Green Point. The hon. member pleaded, in the first place, for equal salaries for Whites and non-Whites. Now it is possible for one to understand why the former member for Durban (Central) is no longer in this House, because he was the man who always adopted a standpoint opposed to equal salaries. One should leave the matter of determining whether real justification does exist for such equal pay to the bodies and people concerned in the matter. The second matter with which the hon. member ventured to deal was the nursing profession. He referred to the so-called wastage which occurred during the training of nurses. The wastage is not as considerable as the hon. member wanted to suggest here. I do not think we need discuss that. What I do want to refer to is that there are reasons why a large number of nurses do not complete their training. One of the reasons why they do not complete their training involves the question of educational qualifications. So as to avoid being accused of generalization, I want to quote from a statement of the final examinations for general nurses for 1969. From the statement we notice that 68.4 per cent of the white nurses with a Std. 10 certificate who sat for the examinations, passed those examinations. At the provisional examinations, which should give us an indication of the future, that figure increased to 69.5 per cent. I think this is proof that one of the reasons why they do not complete their training is that people who have lower educational qualifications than Std. 10 are, in any case, not able to undergo this training successfully. As a matter of interest I may mention that as far as the standards lower than Std. 10 are concerned, the pass rate was only 31.6 per cent in the case of the final examinations. In the case of the provisional examinations it was 30.5 per cent. In other words, the percentage of successful candidates with educational qualifications lower than Std. 10, does in fact show a decrease.

In this regard I also want to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the hon. the Minister for promulgating the regulation last year that as far as the future was concerned, a Std. 10 certificate would be an essential admission requirement for training as a nurse and that it would no longer be optional as in the past.

There is another matter I should like to bring to the kind attention of the hon. the Minister. This concerns a local matter in my constituency. It is a matter which is of great importance to the aged and less privileged in our community. They are the chronically ill patients of the district surgeon who periodically have to go to the provincial hospital on certain days of the week for certain treatment which they receive at the hospital. Now I want to say that in our case this hospital is situated far from the central part of the town. Those people, they are mainly elderly women, etc., do not have their own transport, especially not during those hours when they have to visit the hospital. Now they find it extremely difficult and even unpleasant to approach people at times and to literally beg them to take them to hospital. I wonder whether I may address the very friendly though urgent request to the hon. the Minister for provision to be made in our case at the rooms of the district surgeon, or wherever it may be suitable to do so, for a place where these chronically ill can receive their injections and other treatment for which they have to visit the hospital at present. If it is not possible to do so in practice, I want to ask whether an arrangement cannot be made for those people to be taken to the hospital together in, for example, a small bus or something similar and for the State to accept responsibility for the costs thereof.

In conclusion I want to express a word of thanks for the change which has been introduced to the effect that these people who want to make use of the services of a district surgeon will no longer have to obtain a letter from a magistrate, but will now be able to obtain treatment on the production of their pension cards. The position is, however, that many of them who are pensioners and who are living under very difficult circumstances, really cannot afford essential medicines. They have to pay for such medicines. I am referring to headache tablets, etc. Is it not possible to extend this service to some extent so as to include the less important medicines, if one may call them that? If these concessions can be made, the costs will not be too high and this will remove a heavy burden from the shoulders of our more elderly pensioners.

The hon. members for Rosettenville and Geduld referred here—and I know many of the other hon. members would also have liked to have done this—to the presence of a lady in the officials bench. Prof. Erasmus is not able to thank hon. members herself, and for that reason I am doing it on her behalf. I am certain that her presence here is also appreciated by our Department. I should like to add something in this regard. As far as I can remember this is the first time, in all the time I have been sitting in this House of Assembly, that a lady has sat in the officials bench, and in this respect, history is being made here today. I want to express the hope that in the same way the Department of Health will be able to make history in the years which lie ahead.

The hon. member for Springs raised the question here of the transportation of elderly ladies, and I take it men as well, who have to receive certain treatment in provincial hospitals. They are for the most part district surgeon cases. I just want to inform the hon. member that I do not know what the local circumstances are, but in general the district surgeon cases are under certain circumstances entitled to ambulance and other transportation. I shall certainly ask the Director of Hospital Services to go into this specific matter in Springs and see whether we cannot accommodate these people. It is doubtful whether it will be possible to establish the facilities at the consulting rooms of the district surgeons, because it may be specialized treatment. As for the second point the hon. member raised, i.e. headache tablets for example, I can see no reason why these cannot be prescribed, if it is essential for that person’s treatment. The District surgeon has a free hand; no restrictions are imposed on him. The hon. member can therefore inform his voters that the district surgeon is definitely able to supply them with these tablets.

Certain points were also raised here in regard to the nursing profession. I just want to say to hon. members that the hon. member for Springs has for many years now been doing excellent work on the Nursing Council, and that I personally owe him a vote of thanks for the contribution he is making there and for the services he is rendering in regard to the nursing profession.

The hon. member also discussed the very important matter of pollution, and so did the hon. member for Umbilo. I should just like to give the Committee a little information in regard to the activities of the Department in this important sphere. In the first instance we recently filled the post of chief officer for the combatting of atmospheric pollution, as well as a few additional posts. The first task is the tracing of scheduled processes. Much progress has been made with this, and the expectation is that we will include 700 industries dealing with approximately 1,000 processes. I can also inform hon. members that 360 certificates have already been issued to industries and that further notifications have been served on 192 industries to reply to the questionnaire which will then enable the specific officers to take the necessary steps. In addition it is very important to hold group discussions to keep our people informed in this respect. Here I must mention the much appreciated and exceptional co-operation we are obtaining, in particular from the industries throughout South Africa. Just to give an idea of the extent of the work, during the first six months of this year and with a very small staff, no fewer than 277 inspections were made. If hon. members were to take into account that the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act has not been on the Statute Book for long, then they can understand that there is still a great deal to do.

What about the Railways, in regard to atmospheric pollution?

Yes, there is still a great deal to be done, also in regard to all State departments. In the recent past we made very good arrangements with the Administrator of the Transvaal, about the smoke given off by school hostels, and so we are making progress from one Government Department to another. But I have every sympathy with the problem of atmospheric pollution, particularly in certain times of the year when there is not much movement of the air. But now hon. members must also understand that there are certain essential services which cannot simply be stopped. In such cases the apparatus which has to be installed to counteract the smoke, costs a good deal. A reasonably small factory in a certain town is installing this equipment, and it will have been installed by the end of the year, but it costs them R¼ million just for that piece of apparatus. So, we are getting co-operation. Then I just want to add that we have an educational film which is really good; it produces good results. In addition a correspondence course has now been introduced at the Witwatersrand technical college with effect from 1st April, where smoke inspectors can be trained and I am very pleased to see that we have already received 80 applications from persons who want to take this course. I hope they will become available for the various cities throughout South Africa. In addition we are, later in the year, in October, I think holding a conference in Johannesburg, where international experts will also be present to instruct the various interested parties such as industry, etc., on the finer aspects of atmospheric pollution.

What countries will be represented there?

No, it is not countries which will be represented there. These are people who have special knowledge of atmosphere pollution, and who have been invited in their individual capacities, but I do not know who they are. It was interesting that it was in fact the hon. member for Umbilo who spoke, because I want to pay Durban a compliment. Durban is the one city in South Africa which, as far as I know, has done most to counteract atmospheric pollution, and this redounds to their credit. Then, too, I want to say that the increasing demand for pure air has made it necessary for us to give our attention to the smoke from diesel vehicles. This is a very difficult problem, and unfortunately we have been unable to effect the amendment and adjustment of the provincial road ordinances accordingly. But we have progressed to such an extent that the larger cities in the four provinces will soon be declared to be controlled areas, and that steps in this connection will then be taken.

Lastly, there is the dust nuisance from mine dumps. Hon. members who live on the East and West Rand know that good progress is being made there. So, in general, I can inform hon. members that with a very limited staff I feel happy that we have during the past few years made exceptionally good progress, and that in this respect we are also grateful to the C.S.I.R. for their having placed at our disposal one person in particular.

The hon. member for Newcastle referred to the population explosion which is of course not only taking place in South Africa but throughout the entire world, and this is very closely associated with family planning. Family planning in South Africa is a matter which has not received much attention over the years, but we have made reasonable progress. As one hon. member justifiably remarked, the expenditure in one year increased from R170,000 to R290,000. There are voluntary organizations that are doing good work in this connection, but one will only be able to apply and expand family planning to good effect if we have a hospital-centralized service with various clinics so that we can include in this the health education, and also the improvement of the socio-economic circumstances of the families. As for the non-Whites, it is of the utmost importance—and this is what is being done—that we must use a non-White to serve non-Whites; in other words, a Coloured to educate the Coloureds, an Indian to educate the Indians, and the same with the Bantu nations. We also have certain films which have already been made, one for the Coloureds and another for the Bantu which will be exhibited to them in order to bring home to them that family planning is very important in accordance with their ability to maintain a large family, etc. We have therefore made progress in this respect. I want to give the hon. member for Newcastle the assurance that this is in fact a very important matter. The less we say about it, the better. People are very sensitive about this matter. If we can expand it so that health officers and nurses can do this work together with other matters at the clinics, we will achieve far greater success.

The hon. member for Walmer expressed his concern at the food surpluses which are from time to time being destroyed. Of course we share that concern of his wholeheartedly. The hon. member mentioned the example of millions of gallons of milk which had been disposed of over a certain period. This is unfortunately a problem with which all countries of the world are faced. It is in fact a matter to which the Department of Agriculture in the first instance should give attention. I can inform the hon. member that together with the Department of Agriculture we have a committee which did go into this matter recently. From time to time there are surpluses of oranges as well. I want to say to those people dealing with feeding schemes at schools that they should concentrate on food surpluses. This is something which occurs suddenly and which does not apply throughout the year. Precisely because it occurs periodically, it is purely from a health and nutritional point of view of the Department of Health, not of much value. As far as we are concerned, one must have a balanced diet throughout the year. I agree with the hon. member, however, that one could possibly make better use of these surpluses. We do have subsidized milk powder schemes. One hundred and eleven local authorities and three Bantu authorities are already participating in this. Our major problem lies in the Bantu homelands where up to now nothing much has been done about these feeding schemes. With the entire reorganization of health services, where there is at least one central control now and we are exercising that control on behalf of the Department of Bantu Administration, the idea is to expand this to the various mission hospitals. I think that we will at those centres, together with the clinics, obtain the best results. There is of course another problem which we must never overlook. That is, namely, the terrible problem of the Bantu and their customs. It is not a question of underfeeding. It is a question of malnutrition. There are a host of examples of this. Where the necessary food, for example milk powder, is provided, what happens is that the head of the house consumes it while his poor wife and children get nothing. That is why we have a tremendous task in regard to nutritional education in the years which lie ahead.

The hon. member for Green Point spoke about “the fear of illness”. That is true. People have the fear that they may become ill, as well as the additional fear of the high cost of medical services and medicine. This is, however, something which should be viewed in its correct perspective. What I want to say now, ties in with what the hon. member for Rosettenville said in regard to free hospital services for all. Almost three million Whites in South Africa, that is members and their dependents, already belong to medical schemes to-day. In other words, the vast majority have no fear of illness. On the other hand, there is not a single indigent person who cannot obtain hospital and medical services. I think we must concede that this is the case in South Africa to-day. If there is a single person to whom these are not available, I should like to hear from him or her, because this need not be the case. Then the hon. member put a question to me in regard to the hospital services in the Bantu homelands. It is a fact that the Department of Health is the Department which merely renders the service to the Department of Bantu Administration and Development, acts in a supervisory capacity there, and plans these services.

And in general hospitals?

I shall still refer to that. For those purposes R26,850,000 has been appropriated on the account of my colleague, the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. That, then, in respect of the Bantu homelands. The policy which is going to be followed there is the general policy of hospital-centralized services; in other words, that our hospital and health services in all their facets and aspects are mutually integrated.

Dr. Gluckman’s policy.

No, Dr. Gluckman’s policy was the opposite. This is in any case the policy which is going to be followed there and it will be of great benefit to our Bantu. As far as the Bantu in the white areas are concerned, they are the responsibility of the Provincial Administration. They fall under hospitalization, and so on. When it comes to health education in respect of contagious diseases, tuberculosis and psychiatry, it remains the responsibility of the Department of Health, as is at present the case. In this connection I may just say that our policy is to establish as many of the institutions as possible, for the treatment of tuberculosis and psychiatry in the Bantu homelands, as finances allow. This will to a certain extent help to create growth points in the homelands. The hon. member also asked me a question in regard to the commission of inquiry on nursing. I do not understand why he says that this did not belong to the Provinces, because the reports …

You told me in reply to a question that you had received the report in July last year and that you had sent it in July this year to the Provincial authorities.

It was sent to all the Provinces and to all interested parties.

Twelve months later.

Yes, it was sent much later because we as a Department first had to acquaint ourselves with what was important. We are waiting for comment now; I understand that we have already received some of the comment, although I have not yet seen it. We are obtaining this comment so that we can consolidate it and compare it, and arising out of that we could possibly make a submission to the Cabinet.

Now I want to say something in all fairness to this House, and I want to do so without detracting from any of the members of this Commission. Unfortunately there is not much of importance in this report. There was a tremendous amount of work connected to this report, and the persons did work hard, but anyone who had great expectations of this commission’s recommendations will be disappointed.

The hon. member for Witbank spoke here with much feeling on behalf of our less well-to-do elderly people. Not only did he talk about our less well-to-do elderly people but also about our lonely people. It is true that the percentage of elderly people in the community is increasing. As far as accommodation is concerned, in other words, homes for the aged and so on, the hon. member knows that this is the function of the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions. I should also like to express my thanks to the voluntary organizations which are also doing a tremendous amount in this regard. Another point which I must also mention—this is something which is not said every day—is that the medical practitioner throughout South Africa, and then I am speaking about the medical practitioners with a private practice, is doing a tremendous amount as a labour of love and free of charge for the more elderly and indigent people. There are many more white sheep in this profession than there are black sheep, particularly in regard to our elderly people. I can understand now that elderly people who are suffering pain and who are lonely and who find it difficult to get there, could be upset if they were referred by the district surgeon to other doctors in the hospitals and from thence to someone else. I am afraid however, that this is simply the way matters stand, and we cannot do anything else. In fact, this also happens in private practice to the most well-to-do people. If something serious goes wrong with one again, from the time he leaves the hands of his private doctor to the time he is well again, he goes through the hands of many doctors. This is unfortunately the case. The hon. member also spoke here about the waiting time at the district surgeon and at the hospitals. I have every sympathy with this, and I should like our elderly people to receive immediate attention. However, this is simply one of those things we will have to accept. I am not saying that it must be exaggerated, and every attempt should be made even by doctors and institutions to afford our more elderly people an opportunity to be seen first. I am afraid, however, that the waiting time forms part of the whole system and set-up as we know it to-day. The hon. member pleaded for the expansion of district nursing services and so on. To that I unfortunately cannot give the hon. member a reply to-day, as I am unable to reply to many other questions as well because, as the hon. member knows, the White Paper of the Borckenhagen Commission’s reports will soon be laid upon the Table. However, the hon. member said one thing which I do nevertheless have to set straight. This may be his impression, and it may have been conveyed to him in good faith, but it is not true. That is, remedies which are a little cheaper because they do not want to burden the State with the costs of expensive remedies. I should like to say to the hon. member that if he has any such idea, he should rid himself of it. I want to say here to-day and I am directing this to every district surgeon in South Africa, that of course State money should not be wasted. Nor is it inevitably the case that the more expensive remedy is the better remedy, but no restrictions may be imposed in regard to the remedy which is necessary for the patient. I want to bring this home to every district surgeon. What he prescribes is solely in his own discretion. I think it would be a good thing if the Press could give this matter some publicity. From the nature of the case our patients must also not try to judge what remedy is the best and what is not. That is why we have now come forward with legislation to the effect that the kind of remedy given to patients on prescription, may not be advertised in the lay Press. After all, it is impossible for the layman to judge which of these remedies, which he can only get on prescription, is the best for him. That remedy which helped another person with the same disease is in the case of a different person precisely the remedy which must not be prescribed. I want to say again, however, that there are no restrictions whatsoever on doctors; that what he wants to prescribe is soly his own decision.

In the first place the hon. member for Geduld spoke of a more centralized health service in South Africa. The hon. member knows how I feel about this matter, but because it is very closely related to the contents of the Borckenhagen Report, all I can say is that I took cognisance of his plea with great satisfaction. As for psychiatric services, as well as contagious diseases, I am of the opinion that it is necessary that this should as quickly as possible become the entire responsibility of the Department of Health. I must say that in this respect we are getting very good co-operation from local authorities in particular who have hospitals for contagious diseases under their control.

Then, too, the hon. member mentioned the sound idea that young girls undergoing military training should preferably be used in hospitals. Some time ago I went into this matter very thoroughly, but I am afraid that no matter how fine it sounds, we simply do not get the support from those people who ought to know and who have to work with these matters. Firstly, the Defence Force is beginning, on a small scale, with a number of young girls only who are being trained at George. Secondly, I have been told that it simply cannot be reconciled with the satisfactory nursing of a patient if someone is compelled to do so. That creates all kinds of problems. Thirdly, I can inform the hon. member that the professions dealing with this, namely the nursing profession and the medical profession are simply not in favour of it. Both the nursing association and the medical association have expressed themselves unequivocally opposed to this, for various reasons which I find acceptable. I am simply mentioning these factors to the hon. member. In any case it is at this stage simply impracticable, because this scheme only comprises a number of young girls at present. The hon. member also spoke about maternity facilities. There is something I should just like to get straight in this connection. The hon. member said—I do not know whether this is the way he intended it —that a non-White could have a confinement in a hospital for 55 cents. I think we must note that as hon. members know, as far as non-Whites are concerned, it is mostly the complicated cases which go to hospital. Ordinary maternity cases among non-Whites are not admitted to hospitals. It is true that maternity cases cost a great deal of money, but fortunately it is also the case that most medical schemes have 80 per cent or 100 per cent maternity benefits. Last week I had a discussion with some representatives of the medical schemes. They assured me that if they increased their maternity benefits to 100 per cent it would make a very small difference to their over-all expenditure. They told me that the maternity fees paid out by the schemes were only 2 per cent of their total expenditure. For that reason I hope that all of them —many have already done so—are going to provide 100 per cent maternity benefits. As far as Whites are concerned the problem is that baby is born, a tremendous amount of money has to be spent. If the childbirth costs R120, I think the preliminary expenses are also R120. That is why the Department of Health and the Department of Social Welfare and Pensions went into this matter some time ago. I am not exceeding my limits if I say that I have quite drastic proposals in regard to white maternity cases, which I shall soon be submitting to the Cabinet. The great problem is of course to find methods of doing this precisely. But I think the will is there to do something in regard to assistance for white maternity cases.

The hon. member for Cradock expressed his concern at the increasing use of methylated spirits in some or other form among the Coloured population, and particularly in his own constituency, of which he had knowledge. As far as health legislation is concerned, there is unfortunately no measure which we are applying in this connection, but the Department of Justice is. The hon. member asked whether there could not be intensified control measures. I understand that a survey made here in the Western Cape by the police disclosed that this was not assuming very large proportions; in any case, not proportions which justified special steps. This is the information I have. But I will say that the hon. member suggested a brilliant idea, if I may state it this way, which is to add an emetic, if there is something like that, to the methylated spirits. I think there are perhaps many things to which one could add an emetic to the benefit of the people of South Africa, but this is in any case certainly a very interesting idea to me.

The hon. member for Berea enquired into a few matters. I shall deal with them one by one. Firstly he asked why there was only R200 on the Budget for the Cancer Association. This is merely a contribution, a donation to the Cancer Association in respect of their administrative costs. As the hon. member knows, the Cancer Association as such is doing wonderful educational work in making the public aware that in the case of cancer they must obtain medical assistance as soon as possible. In fact, there is legislation on our desks now which has in fact been drawn up at the request of the Cancer Association and other bodies which is aimed at curbing, at the very least, these cancer quacks. The research being undertaken in regard to cancer must of course not in any way be related to this R200, because cancer research falls under our universities and other institutions. The money is channelized through the Council for Medical Research. Unfortunately I cannot give the hon. member a precise figure in regard to this matter.

The second matter mentioned by the hon. member, is the question of cigarettes. I think there is little doubt that there is sufficient medical evidence to the effect that smoking is a definite contributory factor to the development of various kinds of cancer. This is a fact. Approximately two years ago we held a symposium in South Africa which was also attended by various overseas representatives. There it became clear that there need be no further doubt about this matter. Certain proposals were then made to the Government to counter cigarette smoking. I am perturbed, extremely so, at the effects of smoking and other carcinogenic agents. The Government considered the matter. We are fully conversant with what is being done in Britain for example by means of television in regard to a clamp down on advertisements. We are also aware of the steps which are being taken in America —the obligation, fo example, which exists there to indicate on the carton that cigarettes are detrimental to health, that it can cause cancer, and so on. But at the same time we have also had evidence to the effect that those tests simply had no effect. This means that one will have to go much further than that. If you want to get real results, you will have to be prepared to go the point of absolute prohibition. I know it will come as a disappointment to many hon. members, but the Government has decided that, in view of all the circumstances, no steps will at this stage be taken in South Africa to bring to the attention of the public the possible detrimental results of cigarette smoking. Of course research work will be continued, and the Government will continue to subsidize it. In addition the Department of Health will with increased intensity undertake health education, particularly in regard to this matter.

†The hon. member also inquired about the committee of inquiry into safeguarding man against poisons. The Minister of Agriculture and I discussed this matter some months ago and as a result an interdepartmental committee has been set up and is at present compiling a comprehensive register for use at emergency poison centres to be established at various centres. I made an announcement about this some time ago. Advice will be given immediately on antidotes to be used in cases of poisoning. The departmental committee is also concerning itself with health education in this respect. The chairman of this committee is an official of the Department of Agricultural Technical Services. The Department of Health is also represented.

*I come now to the hon. member for Rosettenville. He put in a plea here for free hospital services. I do not want to be unfair, but I think the hon. member for Springs was correct when he pointed out that a provincial election is at hand and that it was with a view to this that the hon. member had made that plea. [Interjections.] In South Africa the provincial authorities are responsible for hospitalization. The United Party has been in power in Natal since the time of Noah’s ark. and why have the Natal Provincial Council not introduced this?

The subsidy is not enough to do it.

Do you see, Sir, they do not tell us where the money must come from; we must simply find it somewhere. Let me make it clear that I am in favour of giving free hospitalization to as many people as possible, but I am not prepared to saddle South Africa with unnecessary difficulties. I am definitely not prepared that all non-Whites in South Africa should receive free hospital services, although the contributions which they must make, need be very small, even as little as 50 cents. In Britain this matter got out of hand to such an extent that even a socialistic Government, such as the Wilson Government. again introduced certain fees even though the amounts were small.

But they have full social services there.

To speak lightly here of free hospitalization, is something to which we cannot easily concede, particularly with a view to our non-Whites. At present 3,910,000 Whites are members of sick funds. Those funds make provision for free hospitalization

The contributions they have to pay are too high.

I do not think so. The highest contribution anyone has to pay today—and this is where a person belongs to a private fund—is something like R20 per month. The ordinary working man pays an average of R12 to R15 per month, and then the employer still pays half. Now I reckon that the head of a family who pays R7 or R10 for hospital services and medicine, is not paying too much. In respect of specific services, such as maternity services, we can bring alleviation by means of subsidies, but to come here and to advocate general free hospitalization, is not something which can easily be conceded to. The hon. member said that we should now have a separate body, and if we could administer Iscor we could also administer such a scheme, but that is not the problem. If administrative errors occur in the collection of funds, patients have to pay, then things have to be set straight here. But we cannot introduce the most extreme principle of socialism here. Of course I have sympathy with our people and I do not want to see them paying too much when they are ill, that is why provision has to be made for each individual, and we are in fact doing so in future to an even greater extent. The hon. member for Rosettenville made this proposal without any plan; he just wanted to make conversation. He gave no indication as to where the money should come from and how it would be possible to bring the four provinces together. He did not have a word to say about the Borckenhagen Report or about the recommendations contained therein. He had no knowledge of the hospital-centralized service with which we now want to make a start in the homelands. Under the circumstances he must not take it amiss of me if I say that he had his eye on the provincial election. Our people cannot allow ourselves to be caught by that; they must realize that they will have to pay for this themselves.

Sir, may I have the privilege of the half hour? I have endeavoured in all clarity during this session and before the session to find from the many utterances of the hon. the Minister some indication of some plan so far as his Department is concerned. But, Sir, I have looked in vain. The hon. the Minister’s public utterances range far and wide, but I am afraid that there is one thing that is very clear and that is that the effectiveness of the administration of his Department is very limited. I want to remind you, Sir, of some of the hon. the Minister’s statements and reveal some of the superficiality of his approach in so far as the problem of housing in South Africa is concerned. The present Minister assumed responsibility for housing shortly before the 1969 session of Parliament, and in giving a review of the work of the department taken over by him he claimed that in 1967 his Department had reached the position ‘where we have met the full demand for houses and actually built more, thereby making up any backlog which might have existed’. He entered into the field by making that statement in so far as his Department is concerned. But in fact he omitted to check with his predecessor who at the same time informed the House that the backlog in housing, as a minimum, at that stage, was 5,700 for Whites, 26,700 for Coloureds and 13,400 for Indians, a total of 45,800, excluding Bantu requirements.

I never said that there was not a backlog.

Sir, if the hon. the Minister will bear with me I will come to some more of the nonsensical statements he has made and I will quote his own words, because the Minister’s department has presented us with a report in which it says that there is no shortage of housing for the lower income groups. Sir, what does the Minister’s own National Building Research Institute say? What did it say during July of this year? It savs that there are 24,000 new housing units which will be required for Whites during 1970. I want to know whom the Minister is trying to bluff with his statements because in February. 1969 he confessed that the Government realized as far back as 1966 that land prices were soaring and that the acquisition of building sites was beyond the economic power of our ordinary people. He confesses to having known that in 1966, but what does he do? He sits with this problem on his lap; he sits with this problem in his Department and eventually at the beginning of this year or the end of last year he appointed a departmental committee of inquiry to investigate this problem. Sir, four years were lost. Let me quote what the hon. Minister said in 1969—

The overall housing position is sound and there is no general shortage of housing.

Does the hon. the Minister really say that that is the position in this country at the moment?

Yes, that is the position.

Sir, if ever there was an indication to show the incompetence of this Minister, then it is that statement which he has just made. I hope that those many thousands of white South Africans who are queueing for housing …

Where are they? Why don’t you bring them to me?

Sir, let the hon. the Minister contain himself for a while. Does he tell me that there is no shortage of housing for the Coloureds living in the transit camp at Bellville? Does he tell me that there is no need for housing in Ceres? Does he tell me that there is no need for housing arising from the various slum clearance undertakings?

I dare you to deal with white housing.

Sir, the hon. the Minister can make his speech in due course. [Interjection]. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will contain himself. Let me remind him that he gave an interview to the Cape Times, which was reported on the 18th July, this year. Sir, this is where the housing is needed. The Minister says that there is no shortage. Let me quote to him what he said in that interview. He explains what he is doing at various places and then he says—

No shortage!

How many have we built?

I am coming to that. Then he goes on to say that the Department of Community Development, the private sector and the local authorities built 27,000 units in 1969. But did they? Sir, I will come to the figures that the hon. the Minister sucks out of his thumb in this glorious way to show how effectively he is running this Department. Sir, there have been opportunities which the hon. the minister could have taken to do some more effective work to achieve some success in providing houses but he let these opportunities slip through his fingers. He knows full well, as we have pointed out to him over the last two or three years in this House, that the limit of R9,000 which he places on 90 per cent housing bonds is unrealistic and useless so far as the general public is concerned.

You are talking nonsense.

Sir, I call the hon. member for Brakpan as my witness. The hon. member stood up in this House and said exactly that to the hon. the Minister. The hon. the Minister says that R9,000 is effective. When I asked him how many houses his Department had been able to build to sell to the white people of South Africa within that price range, in the last five years, the answer was that the total in the whole of the South African Republic that his Department had been able to build—and they have all the advantages of building in the cheapest possible way—was 960.

What about the local authorities?

The hon. the Minister now jumps to the local authorities.

Where do they get their money from; do they get it from you?

I am telling the hon. tht Minister—he knows this; it has been repeated in the Press—that the limit of R9,000 for a 90 per cent bond is an unrealistic and a useless figure so far as the general public is concerned. Then I want to put a second point to the hon. the Minister: I want to ask him also what he has done to deal with the problem of the building industry? What representations has he made to the Minister of Labour? What representations has he made in regard to the needs of the building industry in the provision of housing? Sir, he has not done anything. He has made no representations at all and, if he has, it will be the first time that we have news of such representations, if he is able to tell us in the course of the debate that he has made representations.

That is an irresponsible statement that you are making.

I am not making an irresponsible statement. I want the hon. the Minister to tell me what arrangements he has made or attempted to make with the Minister of Labour to deal with these problems in the building industry, problems of which he is aware.

Then. Sir, I want to draw attention to the delays in the approval of townships. During the time that the Minister has been in office there has been no effort and no effective step taken to speed up the approval of townships by the various authorities concerned with townships. That again is a matter which is mentioned in the report of the Niemand Commission as one of the factors responsible for the fact that there is not sufficient land available for housing. The commission points out that one of the factors in this situation is the inordinate delay in the approval of townships.

Finally there is another matter in which the Minister has been completely idle and in connection with which some steps could have been taken. I refer to the speculation in undeveloped building sites which should be made available for the general public. Sir, proposals have been made in this House. I am sorry that the hon. member for Brakpan is not here this afternoon because he was the one who indicated to the hon. the Minister during a debate in this House, not only that the limit of R9,000 for 90 per cent bonds was unrealistic but that the income ceiling of R5,000 per annum for economic loans should be raised if it is to be a realistic figure in relation to the price of the property.

Where would you like the limit to be fixed?

I want to say also that the hon. member for Brakpan put forward a proposal which we supported and which he adopted from proposals made by us. That is that there should be some form of tax rebate on home purchases to encourage the acquisition of homes and to reduce the payments made by individuals. But has this hon. Minister ever tried to approach the Treasury to get some system of tax rebate for home purchases? I do not think the hon. the Minister has done anything about it. If he has, let him tell us what he has done.

I am not going to do anything about it either.

Does the hon. the Minister not agree that there should be any encouragement to home purchases by way of tax rebate?

As far as you are concerned all taxes should be abolished and all services should be increased. I am not so stupid.

Sir, it is quite clear from the hon. the Minister’s statement that he rejects out-and-out, on behalf of the Government. the proposal that there should be some tax relief to assist an individual to purchase a home in which he and his family are to live.

I am not in favour of it.

Sir, let me go on to the next point. When the hon. the Minister is faced with these problems, when he is told what these problems are, he comes out with Press statements giving the advice to young couples that they must do without servants; that they want to live too comfortably. He wants to know why a young married couple with a couple of children cannot live in a block of flats in a congested city area; why must they have a house; why must they have a garden? Is that the attitude of this Government towards the young people of South Africa?

They must buy what they can afford.

He has been so incompetent in regard to the provision of housing facilities for these people that he now expects them to live in congested city areas in blocks of flats and be denied a normal family life in a home or cottage, which is their right in a country like South Africa.

When I was married under the United Party, I lived in one room and I was a United Party man.

Sir, if the hon. the Minister has had that experience, then it appeals me even more that he should adopt the attitude in this House that the young children of South Africa are to be brought up in flatland.

Who said that? I never said anything like that.

That is what the hon. the Minister said.

He said that they must buy what they can afford.

Sir, I have some difficulty with the Minister. Even when I quote the Minister he want to know what I am quoting from and when I tell him, then he immediately denies having said what he said two minutes before.

I never said that everybody must live in flats. You are talking utter nonsense. I will not fall for your generalizations.

The hon. the Minister knows perfectly well that he did give this advice: “I cannot see why a young couple with one or two children should not live in a flat.”

And I repeat that.

A minute ago the hon. the Minister said that he did not say it. Sir, I cannot take it much further. [Interjection.] Sir, will the hon. the Minister just keep quiet for a couple of minutes?

You are making it very difficult for me.

Sir, those people vitally concerned with the provision of housing, such as the building societies and the building industry, have pleaded with the hon. the Minister to help them to overcome their problems. He has done nothing to assist them. When eventually the Government decided that building societies could enter into the field of township development, what was the next step? As soon as a building society wishes to develop a township it must go to the Minister of Finance and then it must come to the Minister of Community Development to find out whether it can do what they have already empowered the building societies to do. The building societies are frustrated and discouraged from taking action because of the attitude of this Government. When they want to develop a township they have to raise the whole matter again and obtain the consent of this Minister.

Sir, the high building costs which are ever increasing have been referred to in the report of the Niemand Commission which I will come to a little later. The problem that we have at the present moment in South Africa is this: As much as the hon. the Minister may wish to close his eyes to this problem, the problem is that rent control over buildings is drying up the provision of housing by private enterprise. The cost of building which has to be faced at the present time by anybody wishing to put up a block of flats is so high that it is impossible for the builder or owner to let the flats at a rental which will ensure a reasonable return. The Minister knows that that source of housing is drying up. The development of townships is drying up because of the frustrations suffered by township developers. Sir, these are the problems that this Minister is facing, and it does not help for him to throw out accusations and to make counter-accusations in all directions, as he does, as to who should put the matter right. I want to ask the Minister in what areas near our cities he has endeavoured to obtain from the Department of Agriculture, which owns a lot of undeveloped property which is not used for agricultural purposes, ground for development as dormitory areas near the cities of South Africa?

Ask Etienne Malan.

I am asking where he has done it. Let him tell us where he has made those properties available for township development. This is a sorry picture which has developed in this country in regard to housing and I believe that a lot of this is due to the fact that the Minister’s activities are becoming too widely diversified without any real action in any sphere of those activities.

Is the hon. member in favour of the abolition of rent control?

I have not said that at all. I believe rent control is necessary while this acute housing shortage continues. Of course it must remain but I am not saying that it is properly applied in all cases.

Do you know that no post— 1966 building is under rent control?

That is correct. I am not concerned with luxury buildings on the Golden Mine, or whatever the Minister is repeatedly talking about. I am talking about accommodation for the middle and lower income groups and I defy the Minister to show us in Cape Town where flats which are not under control, are lettable and obtainable by the average person in the middle income group, with a rental within 20 per cent of his income.

What is the demand?

The demand is enormous. I want the Minister to find out from the Department of Statistics how the percentage of income which is being spent on rental by the average South African citizen is growing out of all proportion. The Minister knows that it was normally accepted as being 20 per cent. The majority of families are spending 25 per cent or more of their income on rental, and they are even paying higher to keep a roof over their heads. But I was saying that the Minister’s Department was becoming too diversified without taking any definite action in any direction. At the moment in Cape Town the Minister has acquired in District Six properties which cost R13 million under his slum clearance scheme. Immediately those properties are removed out of productivity first of all as regards the City Council, because no rates are paid on them and they have become a dead loss to the city. How much longer is the Minister going to sit on those properties and many others which are being held by his Department and which take years and years before they are put back into use by the public in the various cities?

I want to deal with further aspects as far as the neglects of the Minister’s Department are concerned. I appreciate that we are tied up with the ideologies of this Government and that the first priority is the removal of population groups from one area to another. The Minister has been forced to demand, for instance, from the Cape Town City Council that not less than 30 per cent of the houses built to house Coloured people are to be made available for the displacement of Coloured persons from one residential area to another. That demand has been superimposed on the need for housing.

There are other aspects of housing which I would have thought also the Minister as the Minister of Community Development would have given some attention to, and that is the type of housing which is provided in most of the large cities of the world by the state, particularly in Holland. That is the communal housing for aged persons who are able to pay rentals and do not want charity. Where has this Minister put up one modern complex to deal with the housing of the aged as one finds in The Hague and other parts of the Continent?

At Germiston.

I am not talking about old age homes. I am talking about housing which can be paid for in relation to the income of these old people who require housing, not people who are living on the old age pension.

I am telling you again, in Germiston.

In the Green Point and Sea Point areas the boarding-houses are disappearing, but this Government has not reacted in any way whatsoever to meet the problem created by this change of conditions in the modern world. Those are the complaints I lay at the door of the Minister. This Government has failed lamentably in dealing with these problems. If the Minister feels I am exaggerating, let me remind him of two of the remarks made by the State President at the Opening of this Session of Parliament. The first was in regard to housing. This is the Minister who says there is no housing problem, no housing shortage, and the State President himself said it was the hope of the Government that the housing backlog would be caught up with within seven years. Why does the Minister say I am talking nonsense when I say there is a housing shortage?

When did I say that there was not a housing backlog?

The hon. the Minister says there was a housing backlog, but not a shortage.

Do not talk nonsense. I said we were making up the backlog.

This Minister forgets what he said. In 1969 he said he had made up the backlog. His departmental report said there was no shortage. Now he tells me there is a backlog and the State President told us it would take seven years to get anywhere near to catching up with it. I am reminded that the Minister at 5.30 this afternoon informed us that there was no backlog.

But I want to go further and deal with the question of these aged persons. There again there was a promise, a statement of good intention, by the State President at the opening of Parliament as to what would be done. But we have had so many of these statements of good intention from the Minister that I just want to remind him that we are not very keen to travel on that road of good intentions which traditionally leads to a place we would not like to go to. But that is what is happening with this Minister. He stands up here and threatens. He says he will provide every person who wants a house with a house, but in the meantime these problems are not being tackled effectively. I want to make this appeal to the Minister. I think he realizes that the problem of housing will never be solved in this country until private enterprise is satisfied that it is worth while building dwelling units both for re-sale and for letting purposes. There are private owners of property who must be encouraged to place their building plots on the market. Placing them on the market goes only half-way to meeting this problem. But the Niemand Commission has found that residential land is now within the means of only 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the white population of our country; in other words, that 75 per cent to 80 per cent of our white population cannot afford to buy building lots on which to build houses. If that is the position, then the Minister’s task is far wider than he tries to tell us when he says he is concerned with the lower income groups. Because this is a startling figure which has been found by his own commission in regard to what the position is. Now, what is available? Property which is available and which has been subdivided is not getting on to market, for various reasons such as speculation. We have said from this side of the House: Tax the speculator who holds land and does not make it available for building purposes.

Then you will hear a row from your people.

I believe that is one way of making these properties available. I believe this Minister has a streak of ingenuity in him and I am sure he can think of ways in which this property can be made available on the market, but he must apply himself to the job and get on with it. The average cost of properties at present on these plots, if they are available, is such that they cannot be acquired within the limits which he now lays down, and that is the purchase price of R10,000. It is not possible. The Minister himself and some municipalities are using labour to the best advantage in building large numbers of houses at one time. They can perhaps get within that figure of R10,000, but the average person who seeks an individual 90 per cent bond is unable to buy a dwelling in any of the cities of South Africa or their environs for R10,000. I believe that these are aspects which the Minister must consider.

I want to conclude by drawing his attention to one class of person who lives in fear and trepidation of financial improvement in his salary. That is the man who just falls within this limit and is living in one of these houses, which are limited to people with an income of R300 a month.

Can you suggest where we should have the limit?

I say this problem exists and I want to draw the Minister’s attention to persons in this category who cannot afford to get an additional R50 a month income because the additional financial burden which will be put on them on having to leave a property like that, is such that it cannot be covered by the additional R50 a month. That is happening in these economic homes. These people are not permitted to remain in these homes.

But they are not kicked out.

The hon. member for Parow may say that is not so, but it is. It happens in case after case. We know of people who cannot afford to take an increase in salary because it means they will have to leave the houses they occupy at present at their present salary scale. The reason is just this, and it highlights this fact. They are the forgotten people in housing. The forgotten people are those fixed income people, the salary and wage earners who are above the R300 limit laid down here and who cannot go into the luxury stage and be counted within the 20 per cent of the population who are found by the Niemand Commission to be able to purchase land. [Time expired.]

I was astounded that an honourable gentleman such as the hon. member for Green Point could display so much ignorance about the actual workings of the Dpartment of Community Development and the good work which that department is doing for the communities of the Republic of South Africa. I shall not discuss the way in which the hon. member railed at the hon. the Minister. He can get his thrashing for that from elsewhere. The fact that he labelled the hon. the Minister as being incompetent makes me wonder whether, if he had had to work under that hon. Minister, he would have survived for a week and still remained in the department.

The hon. member also criticized the Department of Community Development for claiming 50 per cent of certain houses which are being built here in Cape Town for the Coloured people, so that resettlement can take place. I think that when resettlement begins, the department will take almost 100 per cent of the houses at the request of the City Council. The department will not do it at its own request, but because the municipality is not always ready to resettle. The Department of Community Development however, is ready to put all the houses which they can use, into service immediately.

I really think that the time when apartheid was used as an abusive word and a curse has passed, and that that concept has now become a blessing which carries with it the good wishes of the National Party Government as well as the hon. the Minister of Community Development and his department. If the voters of South Africa had not called upon the National Party to continue governing, I wonder how many thousands of families would have been grovelling in the mud to-day as the position was for years in Windermere, and how many would still have had corrugated iron roofs over their heads instead of proper roofs. When the United Party was still in power, they and the United Party’s city councils laid the foundations for creating nothing but slum areas. Those slum conditions increased and multiplied so that the National Party Government was faced with a colossal problem in rectifying this matter when it came into power. The Department of Community Development had to set to work cleaning up, clearing away, planning and building, and now that the party is well on its way to establishing happy communities, we get these vicious attacks on the same department which has been such a blessing and salvation for the State. I do not think it is fair or justified. The hon. members who are so inclined to attack must first search their own hearts and tell us what it looked like in the days when Sophiatown existed. It was, to put it like this, a mass of 100,000 souls under one roof. It was a mess. To-day it has been replaced by Triomf, which is also a triumph for the Department of Community Development. Let us recall the conditions in Newclare, where there was a conglomeration of all non-white groups as well as Whites. To-day it is rapidly developing into a modern Coloured city where the Coloured people can flourish. This happened under this Government. Another example is Ferreira-town, a slum where the worst black marketeering and shebeening went on behind the scenes. To-day it has been cleared up and modern structures have sprung up there. Take Pretoria, for example. In Eersterus, where thousands of Bantu were housed, a modern Jan Niemand Park stands resplendent to-day. Is this not something to be proud of? Let us look at the Cape Province. In Port Elizabeth there were a few fine housing schemes for Coloureds, such as at Dowerville, Lea Place and Stewart, which were surrounded by schemes for white people. In the middle of the white area and in the middle of the white development, there was unrest and dissatisfaction which had to be cleared up. New houses had to be given to those Coloured people so that those houses could be renovated for white people. To-day the Whites live there and the communities are happy, each in its own area.

We must not talk only about what has been done for the Whites and the Coloured people in this respect. What conditions prevailed in the Coloured area of Korsten? It was in fact a hotch-potch non-white township with the Coloured township of Schauder situated next to it. In Korsten at least 56,000 Bantu lived among the Coloureds and they lived in hovels under corrugated iron sheets and in power paraffin drums which had been cut open. All this had to be cleared up to make way for the beautiful structures standing there to-day. This department was responsible for all this, and they succeeded in making Korsten a model township for the Coloured people. In addition, the Coloured people of Dowerville, Lea Place and Stewart were transferred to Gelvandale and Bethelsdorp, where they are living under splendid and modern conditions. What is more, United Party-controlled city council of Port Elizabegh was saddled with a small Coloured township, Windvogel, in the Brighton Bantu area. Under this Government, however, the Coloured people were transferred from Brighton to their own area, where they are happier, and at the same time houses were made available which could be used for the Bantu.

We can also mention Durban as an example. Have there ever been worse conditions than those which prevailed in Cato Manor? This department had to do clearing up work and had to endure unpopularity among many for what it had done in good faith, but now it can be congratulated on what it has done. To-day strong pressure is being exerted for the development of Cato Manor. Certain Whites who did not want it at first, are now asking when Cato Manor will be ready so that they can set to work developing it. These matters are typical of the policy of supremacy (baasskap) which the Unittd Party is applying in its United Party city councils. It is typical of their policy that less well-to-do people are ploughed under and made the slaves of the rich and the capitalist forces. There is no stopping the Department of Community Development and it will look after the poor man. In the same way, it will look after the middle income group. If the well-to-do man also wants a good house, he can go to the Department of Community Development and buy one of the houses which have been built by the Community Development Board. I challenge anyone, even the private sector, to build houses of the same quality for between R9,500 and R11,000 and to make them available in those areas. They can go and take a look and come back to tell us whether this man was telling the truth or an untruth to-day. I know I am telling the truth.

Hon. members know what the position is here in the Cape. Let us look at areas which have already been developed. Let us look at the Indians of Laudium in Pretoria. They are happy and they no longer want to move from there to-day. They are a happy community and we find that Indians in Johannesburg are also keen to come and live in that beautifully developed area. There are similar developments at various other places. For example, we think of the development at Chatsworth near Durban and also of the development in the rural areas such as Barberton and others. At the moment there is a beautiful development scheme for Indians in Benoni as well. The Indians do not want to move from Lenasia. The white people are also happier in their own areas. There is good housing for them. I am thinking of Parow and Goodwood, for example. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Innesdal who has just sat down will forgive me if, in the limited time I have at my disposal, I do not react to all the battles of the past which the hon. member tried to fight all over again.

I think that if there is one aspect of the activities of the hon. the Minister and his Department of which we may expect them to be the absolute masters, it is the expeditious and efficient execution of the expropriation procedure. I think the hon. the Minister will agree with me that any dawdling and delay in the payment of expropriation money create problems, and one finds that the only loser eventually is in fact the person whose property has been expropriated. We all appreciate that the great problem with which the hon. the Minister has to contend is the fact that the market value of a property is pegged as from the delivery of the expropriation notice. Such an owner is in fact powerless until such time as he has the money in his hands. We must accept that where expropriation is done on a large scale, particularly areas which have great business potential, that leads to an increase of land prices in alternative areas. Delay is something which must be avoided and I believe that delay can be avoided. I realize this can only be done if the necessary steps have been taken prior to proceeding to this process of expropriation. Therefore I regret that I have to broach a matter in my constituency, Durban (Central), which will plainly prove that the hon. the Minister granted permission for the expropriation of properties in a certain area without his having ascertained whether his Department was equipped to execute the process of expropriation expeditiously. In the second place, when it became clear that there was in fact a delay in this connection, the hon. the Minister did not take the responsibility for the delay on him or his Department, but placed the blame unjustly on the owners. The area to which I am referring, is generally known in Durban as Blocks AK and G. It is an area which is situated between Umgeni Road and the Greyville race course. This an area which is ideally situated directly opposite the proposed new railway station in Durban. This is an area which has been declared a white are, one in which Indians as well as Whites own properties. As far as the expropriation of Indian properties is concerned, one realizes that to a certain extent the hon. the Minister had no choice and that the declaration of that area as a group area was not his responsibility. As far as some of the white areas there are concerned, this step of the hon. the Minister has, however, hampered development.

I now want to come back to the matter of paying out claims. Some time ago when the matter was broached by the hon. member for Port Natal, the hon. the Minister reacted in a typical way, and I now want to quote from the Mercury of 19th June, as follows: “Mr. Coetzee dismissed the claims as irresponsible and without any foundation.” I quote further from the same report where he said payments had not been made “only in so far as cases where the owners were not prepared to accept the Board’s offer for compensation in terms of the Act”. We now find here that the hon. the Minister referred the offers of the Board, that payments were not made only in cases where persons had not been prepared to accept counter-offers, and that payments were made as far as the other properties were concerned. But what do we find on the 28th July? On that date I asked the Minister how many claims had been paid out and he replied: “No payments have as yet been made, as negotiations between various owners and the Community Development Board are still continuing.” To the question as to how many claims were still outstanding, I received the following reply: “A 162 properties have been expropriated and counter-offers in respect of 134 have been made by the board or are in the process of being made.” It is very clear that this reply implies that 134 counter-offers have been made or are in the process of being made. But here are the typical replies and information which I receive from my own constituency. A week after this reply had been given, I received a letter which reads as follows—

This comes from a firm which handles a large number of these claims.

And I also know precisely which firm it is.

Yes. I quote again—

May I ask a question?

Unfortunately I only have ten minutes; the hon. the Minister has a great deal of time in which to reply to me in this regard. I want to proceed. The next typical case, for example, I found on 2nd September. The previous ones were on 28th July and 7th August. All this is happening despite the fact that the hon. the Minister is trying to blame the persons who are not prepared to accept the counter-offers.

Tell me, why do they not complain to me? I have not yet received a single complaint.

The fact remains. For example, I received a letter on 2nd September which reads as follows—

For example, on 8th October, last year, the hon. the Minister approved of the expropriation of the properties. The notice of expropriation was issued on 9th December last year. Here, for, example I have a letter which was sent on 19th February. It reads as follows—

The Department of Community Development acknowledged receipt of the letter. I quote further—

One finds that they have been in possession of all the necessary documents since 11th February. Here is another typical example where the claims were lodged by a company on 22nd January, 1970. The Department acknowledged receipt of them on the 26th of that month. On 18th May, they made inquiries about the matter of being paid out. They were then informed that the matter was still being investigated. On 23rd June, however, they had not yet received any counter-offers from the Department. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Durban (Central) raised a number of complaints here and my question to him is this: Why did he not bring them to the notice of the Minister earlier? As the Minister said by way of an interjection, he has received no complaints as yet about the matter which the hon. member raised. Apparently the hon. member had nothing else to talk about. The hon. member for Green Point also tried to make a fuss about housing conditions. I still remember the time when I had to fight a byelection in Bloemfontein in the days of the United Party. Admittedly, 22 years have elapsed since they last governed and a long time will elapse before they govern again. But when they were in charge, they also had the opportunity to build houses. We remember well how people had to live in small rooms and in little corrugated iron hovels. There was absolutely no building material available. With the best will in the world, one could not even build a house for a Bantu. Now they are the people who made a fuss here about what we have allegedly not done. The United Party has nothing to boast about. In fact, the time when they governed was a dark period in the history of South Africa; this is what they are trying to shy away from now.

Let us look at what this Government has done over the past number of years. The hon. member alleged that we are not nearly meeting the estimated housing needs, Prof. Sadie estimated that during the period 1965 to 1970 we would have to build an average of 28,200 houses a, year, from 1970 to 1975, 27,000, and from 1975 to 1980, 30,000. His figures are very close to those of the National Building Research Institute, which estimated, the housing need at an average of 26,399 a year for the period 1970 to 1975, at 27,804 for 1975 to 1980, and at 29,243 for 1980 to 1985. Let us now see what has been done over the past five years. I am restricting myself exclusively to houses for Whites. In 1965, 20,957 houses were built by the private sector, and 4,578 by the Department of Community Development; in 1966, 20,516 and 7,336, respectively; in 1967, 22,344 and 4,709, respectively; in 1968, 23,013 and 416, respectively; and in 1969 the private sector built 21,322 houses. To summarize, from 1965 the private sector built 108,062 houses and the Department of Community Development built 24,681 houses, i.e. at an average per year which is close to the average of Prof. Sadie’s calculations. Then we have not yet included the houses which the Department of Defence and the S.A. Railways build for their people. If these are taken into account, we exceeded the average estimate of Prof. Sadie. Calculated in terms of expenditure, the Department of Community Development spent R146 million, i.e. an average of R27,000,000 per year, without taking into account the houses which the Railways and the Defence Force built. If we do include them, we exceed Prof. Sadie’s average estimate of housing needs.

Let me point out to you, Sir, what benefits we are making available to our people by means of the various schemes offered by us. Every day we are accused of doing nothing for our lower income groups. But under our sub-economic schemes, we are financing housing at 3/4 per cent and under the economic schemes at 6½ per cent. In addition, there are rented houses, where a person with an income of R100 to R130 pays 3 per cent interest, from R130 to R160 5 per cent and from R160 to R225 6 per cent, depending on the size of the family. This is only one of the schemes. There are four others. Provision is also made for hostels where the lower income group with an income of R80 per month, for example, pays only 1/20 per cent. In addition, favourable loan conditions are made available, as well as loans for small-holdings of up to R5,000, of which R1,500 can be borrowed for the purchase of land and an additional R500 for the provision of water. In order to eliminate the high cost of building plans, the National Building Commission makes plans available. [Time expired.]

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.