Mr. Speaker, I move as an unopposed motion—

I move—

Agreed to.

Last night I tried to indicate why it is necessary for us to have sustained economic growth in our country. I just want to repeat briefly that it is necessary because we must continue to maintain, inter alia, our importance as a trading partner with our traditional trading partners overseas, so that this can heighten our ability to withstand any possible economic boycotts. Secondly, our growth must at least be equal to that of our trading partners overseas, or we must maintain a higher growth rate so as to ensure that we do not lose our important and competitive position relative to them. In the third place, economic growth is necessary so that we can have finances available for the sake of security, assistance to African states and the implementation of our policy of separate development. But a psychosis is now being created that the economic policy of the Government is subservient to its ideological policy of multi-national development, and that the Government is now, as a result of pure wilfulness, placing certain dampers or gates across the road of our economic growth, merely for the sake of the ideological principles in our policy. But if we now look at the past we see that South Africa’s economic growth, since the National Party came into power, reads like a story that has virtually not been equalled anywhere else. This success, for this economic growth and for this order, peace, quiet and security in South Africa, in contrast with the other African states, can chiefly be ascribed, inter alia, to one single fact. And this is the political stability, order, peace and quiet which the National Party’s policy provided for South Africa. If we look at the pleas from that side of the House, we see that they place the economic growth rate at the very top of the list, and they make everything else subservient to that. They advocate the uncontrolled employment of non-Whites. They advocate friction between white and non-white workers. They advocate uncontrolled influx of the Bantu into the white areas, and all this for the sake of the economic growth, as if economic growth were the key to the continued existence of the Whites here in South Africa. It is specifically that fact, specifically that factor of political stability, that has brought us this far.

But let us look at what prophecies are being made in this House by such prophets of doom as the visionary Mr. Jacobs. What they advocate will specifically bring down the miseries upon us which they claim the National Party’s policy will bring down upon our country.

One has three factors determining economic growth. These are land, capital and labour, and then there are other residual factors that do not apply for the purposes of this argument. Now the opponents of the Government are over-emphasizing this one factor of labour. A psychosis is being created about that, to the effect that the Government wants to jeopardize the entire economic growth, because economic growth is in opposition to separate development; separate development does not allow economic growth. Now hon. members opposite must just show me one Western democratic country where there are no major restrictions, and where conditions are not laid down for the utilization of these three factors: land, capital and labour. We do not have job reservation in South Africa alone. South Africa is not the only country in which we want to prohibit certain people from doing certain work. Let us look at the position overseas; I want to claim that we have fewer restrictions on the horizontal use of labour, land and capital in South Africa than in most of the Western democratic countries. But we have indicated that economic growth is definitely in the interests of the continued existence of the Whites here in South Africa. One would now like to put the question to those people who come along with the argument that it is specifically the Government’s policy that is jeopardizing this economic growth, the people advocating full employment, the people advocating an increase in the standard of living of the Bantu. It is specifically those who advocate that who are not prepared to contribute their share towards its realization. They ask for uncontrolled influx, but if they are serious about increasing the Bantu’s standard of living, if they are serious about obtaining continued economic growth in South Africa, we now ask them why they do not support the Government’s policy; because the economic policy of this Government specifically lends itself to optimum economic growth in our country. We are specifically supplying the opportunity for the industrialist to extend his activities to the borders. We are now also supplying him with the guarantee that he can realize his high growth rate ideals within the Bantu area on an agency basis. Sir, if we test the National Party’s policy, we see it to be a forward-looking party, because if we allow uncontrolled influx, uncontrolled employment, we are specifically jeopardizing that factor which in the past was the guarantee of and the stimulus for greater economic growth.

Sir, the question is frequently asked about what the Government is going to do in connection with the manpower shortage. It is frequently claimed that the Government is not serious about doing anything in this connection. In previous debates other speakers have indicated what we are doing in connection with training. It has also been indicated that the productivity of our workers has been increased by 3 per cent per year in the past. If we look at our past growth, we find that in the ’thirties capital was the damper on our economic development; it was the limiting factor. In the ’fifties it was still capital, and only since 1963 has it been the manpower position, particularly the white manpower position, that has placed a damper on the economic growth rate. It is interesting to see what the Government did in the ’sixties, particularly in order to stimulate our economic growth. We see that during this time 200,000 Whites entered our white labour fore. A great deal of criticism has been expressed about our immigration policy by some of our critics who are not necessarily always sitting on that side of the House, but I want to tell you that the immigration policy we have followed to date has been one of the most impotant factors enabling us to maintain this high growth rate. We see that in the past six years 33,000 people entered the white labour force annually. This represents an increase of 2.7 per cent in our labour force, while our natural growth was only 1.6 per cent. The reasons for this are that, over this same period, from 1963 to 1969, we allowed only 190,000 immigrants into the country, and 73,000 of them were economically active. In other words, 36 per cent of the manpower that became available to our economy from 1963 consisted of immigrants. I think that this is one of the greatest justifications for our immigration policy, because we are not importing immigrants merely for the sake of immigration, but to bring about economic growth and prosperity in South Africa. If we had not imported these people, it would have meant us being saddled with a further shortage of 36 per cent annually.

Sir, if we look at the latest survey of the Department of Labour, we see that there is a 5.3 per cent shortage of white males, and a 2.7 per cent shortage of women. If these figures are altogether correct. it means that if we could succeed in increasing the productivity of every white worker in this country by one-twentieth, we would virtually eliminate the manpower shortage. It would have meant a lot if we could only have improved the productivity or the utilization of our existing manpower by one-twentieth, because then we would eliminate the manpower shortage for the present as far as the Whites are concerned. We could do this in two ways: The one is by working harder, and the other is to eliminate this gap that exists between the supply and demand for manpower by means of organization and method studies, additional automation and the better utilization of manpower. I want to ask that all of us—the industrialists, the workers and all—co-operate in the interests of our country, because economic growth and prosperity are of primary importance for our continued existence, and try to stabilize further economic growth in our country within the limits of these channels that the Government has created. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Lydenburg will pardon me if I do not follow him up, because he was under strain and stress about the forthcoming provincial elections and was working up his election speeches.

Sir, when the Government gave Iscor the go-ahead signal for the development of the Saldanha project, as our premier iron export harbour, one could have assumed that the Government and Iscor had made an in-depth study of all the facets of the international ore trade, especially as far as shipping in giant carriers, the cost per ton, and other relative matters are concerned. When one views this Iscor performance, one can only come to the conclusion that this is one of the silliest stories of the 1970s. Unfortunately we in South Africa may make every endeavour to forget the silly story, but the businessmen of the outside world who view and evaluate all South Africa’s performances and affairs in the bright light of reality are not going to forget this so soon. The top brass of Iscor proceeded to Japan and glibly promised South Africa that they would bring back contracts for millions of tons of ore worth millions of rands. What was the Japanese comment on their efforts?: “Their price was too high and they wanted to ship too small.” Sir, Australia, our biggest competitor, is already negotiating with Japan to ship ore from Australia in vessels of 350,000 tons. Iscor’s premise, the very basis of their negotiations, was to ship ore in 150,000 ton carriers. Sir, this is an elementary affair: As the tonnage increases, so the cost per unit decreases, within reason, of course.

This is the point: Saldanha Bay has been indicated as being our future deep-sea port. That is what Iscor tried to convey to us. I would like to quote from an in-depth study which has been made by private enterprise and which appeared in Travel and Trade of October, 1969. It read as follows—

They concluded this study by saying—

Sir, if the terminal at Saldanha is an on-shore one, as is proposed, a 150,000 tonner cannot under to-day’s circumstances approach closer with safety than 3½ miles of the terminal. There is, at present, being built a 477,000 tonner and that ship will not be able to approach closer, with safety, than 7 miles from the proposed terminal. This type of deep-sea harbour is not dug out of the land, it is built in the sea.

That brings us back to square one. I want to ask the hon. the Minister, through you, Sir, whether he would not once again give very serious consideration to the short-term, the 1970-’80, iron ore terminal which has been proposed for St. Croix in Port Elizabeth? Soros Associates, one of the leading world authorities and consulting engineers on offshore terminals, made an in-depth study of the feasibility of establishing an iron ore terminal at St. Croix. Their findings conclusively proved that it was not only economically feasible but also, in the short-term, a project that we would be well advised to tackle. They found that it was practicable to build this terminal for vessels up to 350,000 tons. This project could be established within two and a half years, including six months for further recording of wave and wind data, for R28 million. This terminal would in the initial stages be able to handle up to 15 million tons per annum, which could conceivably be increased as required. The capacity of the Port Elizabeth-Sishen line would be adequate to transport all ore requirements for this present decade and also the early part of the next decade. That is, if the Railways continue with their planned improvement of installing centralized traffic control, lengthen certain traffic loops and introduce the C-type of ore truck and greater traction power through the introduction of additional diesel engines.

May I stress the very great desirability of the Government giving the green light to Port Elizabeth, which is a short-term project. It will be amortized within ten years. In the meantime experts can locate a site and the South African Government can develop the off-shore deep seawater terminal for the decades of the 80s and 90s for the export of vast quantities of iron ore. In conclusion, those exports are the answer to bridging our trade gap, of earning foreign exchange. The answer is not necessarily only working harder, because we Parliamentarians can vouch for it that we cannot work very much harder. If everybody in South Africa were to overwork, we would become an unhealthy race.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) was apparently not present, or was not listening, because last night the hon. the Minister dealt at length with this whole question of the harbour for the export of ore. I certainly do not expect the hon. the Minister to cover the entire field again, and I myself have nothing to add, because there has already been a full reply to this matter.

I should like to focus the hon. the Minister’s attention on an item under subhead G of the Commerce Vote. We see there that R100 is being made available and appropriated as against R100,000 last year. I notice that this particular item is under the Commerce Vote and not under Industries. I therefore take it that this will not be the ordinary assistance to exporters of industrial products. All I can then deduce is that it is an additional payment of the assistance in respect of devaluation losses. I understood, however, that this Government scheme had come to an end. I should just like to raise this matter so that the hon. the Minister will have an opportunity to explain to us what is going on here.

I actually want to come back to the question of our economic position with respect to the extension of the European Economic Market. The hon. the Minister gave such a brilliant exposition of the economic factors at stake here that I can make no further contribution. I just want to thank him for the brilliant exposition he gave of what our position would be when these E.E.C. countries are expanded, from the present six to many more. I am thankful to know that the hon. the Minister is very well-informed of the problems, particularly the problems concerning the exporters of deciduous fruits, canned fruits and wine and brandy produced in the Western Cape. I wonder whether the people of the Western Cape realize to what extent the entire economy of the Western Cape is built on these products. Since the days of the Cape Colony, when the famous Constantia wines enjoyed world-wide distinction, the economy of the Western Cape was already built on these agricultural products. In the past two decades the manufacturing industry in our country has expanded tremendously. The manufacturing industry in the Western Cape, however, is lagging tremendously, because the most important markets in the interior are, of course, where there is the greatest concentration of population, i.e. in the Witwatersrand and its environs. As a result of the very high railway rates on manufactured goods, the industrialist in the Western Cape is not in a position to compete with his colleagues in the north, because between the Western Cape and the north we find the semi-desert of the Great Karoo. That is why it is of the utmost importance that these agricultural industries of the Western Cape, i.e. the deciduous fruit industry and the wine industry should be protected at all costs. These industries will, for a very long time, still be the basis on which the whole economy of the Western Cape is built.

If we take wine and brandy exports into consideration, we note that the greatest wine producing countries in the world, i.e. France, Italy and to a lesser extent West Germany, are situated within the borders of the E.E.C. It goes without saying that when Britain and other countries join the E.E.C., South Africa’s competitive position in respect of wine and brandy will virtually be made impossible within the enlarged Common Market. As far as canned fruit is concerned, the position will be almost as difficult. As far as fresh deciduous fruit is concerned, we have the advantage of a different production season but with the rapid improvement in cold storage methods this benefit is also progressively diminishing. The actual problem lies in the fact that within the Common Market the import tariffs will be those of the country with the highest import tariffs before the treaty of Rome. This varies from 8 per cent to 22 per cent. That is why there must very definitely be negotiations to lay down concessions. Without concessions it will also become almost impossible for our deciduous fruit producers to compete.

That is why I want to make a suggestion this morning. My suggestion is that a very strong committee be constituted from members of the hon. the Minister’s Departments, i.e. the Departments of Commerce and Industry, the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, and also representatives of these three industries, i.e. the Deciduous Fruit Board, the Canning Board and the K.W.V. A very strong committee must therefore be constituted to give this problem its urgent attention, and to assist with the negotiations in respect of concessions as far as import rights are concerned. Sir, I realize only too well that we are faced here with a formidable problem. What can we actually offer the Common Market as quid pro quo? We cannot offer as quid pro quo that we will decrease import duties on manufactured goods, because we must protect our own industries. I therefore think these negotiations must be guided towards exempting agricultural products from import duty, because they are foodstuffs. We must adhere very closely to the standpoint that we should not place import duties on agricultural products, as against the import duties on manufactured goods, because then our own industries could not evidence the growth that is so necessary. Although I am very well aware of the fact that the hon. the Minister and his Department are giving their urgent attention to this matter, I want to emphasize again that I would appreciate it if he would also give these agricultural product industries in the Western Cape representation on a very strong committee constituted to give this matter its urgent attention.

Mr. Chairman, I hope that my hon. friend the member for Paarl will excuse me if I do not follow his line of argument. But I want to raise to-day briefly a matter which is of the utmost national importance, namely the environmental control of those areas of our land, our sky, our air and our sea around us which are to-day suffering from the threat of pollution. I believe that the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs could be the architect to a monument which would earn him the lasting gratitude of the generations which are to follow if he could introduce into this House some time in the future tough new legislation to control this reckless exploitation of our present natural environment.

Mr. Chairman, in our industrial cities, in the countryside, in our coastal waters, we are beholding to-day a process of devastation. Man who himself is threatened with a population explosion is facing a crowded environment with shrinking horizons. I have only to quote from the Argus of yesterday an article which is frightening in the extreme. It reads as follows—

The hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs, as far as he has it in his power, and his department, can control industrial pollution in our cities. He can control urban pollution, the threat of the exhaust gases from motor vehicles which are damaging our population to-day in health and attitudes even more than the cigarette. He can also control our coastal waters.

It is on this latter subject that I want to expand briefly. If we destroy the life on the continental shelf, the seabed life to-day, then we are faced with creating what is practically a desert in the waters around us. In many countries it has been recognized that if we destroy the riches of the sea and if we do not eliminate this danger, then we will destroy the resources for feeding our exploding population. Even to-day there are nations such as Japan that depend almost entirely on the sea for their food and for many other critical resources. With the closing of the Suez Canal, South Africa has seen the advent of a greater fleet of industrial ships passing our shores than we ever anticipated. With the advent of the vast oil carriers and the threat of wreckage of these carriers which has already become evident in Great Britain where in 1967 the wreck of the Torrey Canyon released some 118,000 tons of oil around the coastline of Great Britain, it is evident that here we have a danger which we cannot underestimate. Scientists are to-day concerned about the danger to human beings and marine life from the steady build up of toxic pesticides in the oceans and from the crude oils which are being dumped or spilled at the rate of thousands of tons per year. In other parts of the world this situation has been recognized. In the Americas there is already a commission of inquiry into the control of the destruction of this one natural environment which is no longer regarded as being either vast or replaceable.

There is a second and less visible but just as significant threat from the waste which emanates from our industrial and crowded metropolitan centres. Already we have in Durban, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London and Mossel Bay, areas where industrial effluent is being dumped into the sea at distressing rates. Each passing day tons of sewage and industrial waste are pumped into the sea to an extent which can become a national scandal. To-day we still have time to manoeuvre. Through the correct legislation which I am certain would be supported by all sides of the House, we still have time to save for posterity this wonderful heritage of ours. Do we realize that in Europe only a few months ago we experienced the industrial pollution of that mighty river, the Rhine, which nearly resulted in the poisoning of hundreds of thousands of people, in an older civilization than ours? In New York to-day there is real concern at the threats of decades of ocean pollution through waste disposal. The once vast harbour oyster beds have vanished. This is the threat that we must relate to our own coastal areas and our coastal continental shelves. We have heard earlier in the debate about the threat to our marine and our sea life.

Now is the time that we can act; now is the time that we will get the support of people from all sides of the country and now is the time that we can save for posterity these coastal areas. Is it realized that in Europe there are many famous tourist beaches which are no longer usable because of the fact that they have been polluted industrially? We have seen something of this in the tourist centre of Hout Bay. This is no parochial matter. We have seen the destruction of the bay there where to-day one can hardly walk on the beach because of the fact that a worthwhile fishing industry is located there. At the same time through the effluent that is being dumped into the sea, to-day the beach as such is hardly regarded as a bathing beach. We have seen the threat on the coast of Natal, a threat that was countered adequately and in time. But these threats will develop. One of the last remaining recreational areas for our growing population, the sea coastline around our country, must be protected at all times. I would merely quote, to give an indication of how serious this problem is, from that authority and great author explorer, Thor Heyerdahl, who records that during his papyrus raft voyage last year, he sighted plastic bottles, squeeze tubes and other debris and at one point in the middle of the Atlantic, the ocean water was so filthy that his crew could not use it to wash their dirty dishes. I hope that all parties in this House will support the need for a thorough inquiry into methods of curtailing the pollution of our natural resources whether they be industrial, urban or ocean.

When my time expired yesterday evening I was dealing with the hon. member for Omaruru. There is one further matter which he raised that I want to reply to. This matter concerns the research ship, the Benguella. The Benguella will continue with its research work in the sea area around South-West Africa. The difficulty lies in recruiting a crew for the ship at Walvis Bay. It was felt that if this ship's base were to be Cape Town instead of Walvis Bay, it ought to be easier to recruit the necessary skilled crew. That is why this ship will now have Cape Town as its base and not Walvis Bay. I hope that we shall achieve greater success with this arrangement.

The hon. member for Simonstown also spoke about our fish. He intimated that he regarded me as an authority in this field. Well, all the hon. members of this House, myself included, are not responsible for everything said and written about us. In any case, the hon. member adopted a few standpoints that I want to comment on briefly. In the first place the hon. member made the statement that over-exploitation of our fishing sources has taken place, particularly in respect of pilchards and crayfish. I do not want to quarrel with the hon. member about this. There are indications that over-exploitation has perhaps taken place. There can, of course, also be other causes for the decrease or disappearance of particular fishing sources. It is therefore not advisable to declare, without more ado, that this is solely attributable to over-exploitation. For example, the hon. member for Cape Town (Gardens) pointed to other causes in the destruction of marine life. The hon. member dealt with a very interesting aspect, though I cannot say we have already reached that stage here on our South African coast. But I am just mentioning it to point out the existence of possible other causes for the vanishing of our fishing sources. The hon. member for Simonstown’s standpoint, which I cannot endorse, is that the cause is to be sought in the Government’s carelessness. It is not so easy to support such a standpoint. The hon. member will acknowledge that the endeavour of any authority and industrialist is to achieve the optimum utilization of this source. That is only logical. But then it is also logical that any responsible person must not exceed this optimum mark—which I want to call the “breaking even” point—because he would thereby kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Our scientific research is still very inadequate, but in this respect South Africa does not lag behind the rest of the world. Other countries of the world are up against this same problem—i.e. that scientific research methods, and the facts we can gather, are not sufficient to enable us to say precisely where the “breaking even” point is. Up to now these calculations had to be made largely on an experimental basis. When we reach the point where danger signs appear, it is not always so easy to retrace one’s steps, because then we are saddled with an industry in which millions of rands have already been invested, and with many people who obtain their livelihoods from that industry. These things must be taken into consideration. When we reach the point where it becomes evident that this source has been harmed, we must take very judicious action. In the first place one would try to stop further destruction of this source, and in the second place, see what one could do to restore it. One must do this without causing serious damage in other spheres. I want to give the hon. member the assurance that the Department is aware of the prevailing danger signs, not only in respect of pilchards and crayfish, but also other kinds of pelagic fish. I am in the process of acquainting myself with the position along the Repuplic's coast, a coast I am not altogether familiar with yet. However, I cannot be able to associate myself with the allegation of the hon. member about alleged carelessness on the part of the Government having led to a dangerous situation developing. The hon. member asked, furthermore, that we should intensify our patrol services. It goes without saying that where we have demarcated fishery zones, we must protect those zones from intrusion by outsiders. And this is not such a simple matter, particularly not for the Republic’s coastal waters. I have a little experience of this matter. There are other problems involved, apart from just the ordinary patrol services. An efficient patrol service depends upon whether it can be manned by the right people, and that is not such an easy matter. As I have said, I have experience of this. Just think about the waters along our West Coast, from the Kunene up in the north to Cape Point in the south—a distance of roughly 1,500 miles where fishery activities are in progress. It is therefore not such a simple matter to institute an efficient patrol service.

Has consideration been given to the possibility of expanding the Navy’s police and also using them for this purpose?

In South-West Africa use has been made of the police. At the moment I do not know what the position in the Republic is. However, I consider that there are other and more sensible methods for protecting our territorial waters, other than by means of drastic action, and in many circumstances it may be more sensible for us to try those channels first.

The hon. member also spoke of a possible expansion of our territorial waters. As the hon. member knows, our territorial waters, for fishery purposes, at present lie within the twelve-mile mark. I do not want to campaign for an extension of this limit. The actual international territorial sea limit is three miles, but when we set it at twelve miles we found ourselves in good company, and were not out of step with what was taking place internationally. We are in step. There are many other countries, and powerful countries, that have resorted to that 12-mile provision.

Our territorial waters do not extend for 12 miles.

In respect of fish. [Time expired.]

I hope the hon the Deputy Minister will not hold it against me if I do not follow him up. I just want to say that it is good to know that the Deputy Minister, and the Government as such, are concerned about our declining fishing industry, and that everything in their power will be done to protect those sources from deterioration, whether through over-exploitation or through pollution of the water.

But I should like to speak to the hon. the Minister about the question of border industries and the establishment of border industries. I should like to ask him how it was determined in the past where such development must take place. I see in the Estimate that an amount of R1,000 is being made available for studies in connection with the establishment of industries outside the metropolitan areas. I would think that these studies are very necessary if we consider the importance of the location of these border industries. But I should like to restrict myself to one limited area, Phalaborwa, about which I have already put a question to the Minister, an area that has already been completely developed.

On 31st July, in reply to a question, the Minister informed me that this area had already developed, and that a tremendous sum of money had already been spent there. Railway lines were introduced at a cost of R370,000, roads at R190,000. the provision of electricity at R270,000, and water at R120,000. Further sums of money were also spent, R130,000 on sewerage and R120,000 on purchasing and planning etc., making a grand total of R1.2 million. In the same reply the Minister told me that this structure was established in the course of the last three years. I understand that most of these services have already been supplied for a considerable time, and no industries have yet been established there. Thus far only one stand has been allocated for an abattoir for the Municipality of Phalaborwa, and the Minister also says that no other sites have been allocated. It seems to me that the Minister must give us a little information, and I should like to ask him how and in which way this site was decided upon; who decided that this site should be developed; what reasons there were to indicate that development in this area was necessary and that it would develop, and whether other areas were taken into account; and if so, what areas, and why were they not established.

I should also like to know from the Minister who finally decided to develop this area, and for what reason. I should also like to know from the Minister if consideration has been given to whether skilled or unskilled labour will be available for this area if these sites are taken up. If the labour is not available there, where is it expected to come from? It seems as if this development is premature. Large sums of money were spent there, money that to-day carries no interest and is performing no service, and I am told that the entire area is lying empty. There is a large degree of neglect. The roads and the railway are being overgrown, and generally it does not look as if there will be any development in the near future. I should like to know from the Minister what the immediate prospects for this area are.

I do not want to reply to what the hon. member for North Rand stated. The Minister will reply to that. He dealt chiefly with the border industries. Towards the end of this debate I was particularly struck by the well-presented arguments on both sides of the House and by the seriousness and calm with which this Vote was discussed. In a previous debate, i.e. the debate on the Defence Vote, we had the same high standards. This brings me to the conclusion that on both sides of this House we jointly want to contribute towards making South Africa capable of holding its own in the military and economic spheres. From this I also want to conclude that we are in the process of forming a South African nation, something which augurs well for this country.

In the short time at my disposal I want to turn my attention to a matter that was also touched upon by the hon. member for Ermelo, i.e. the role of the retailer, particularly in these critical times we are experiencing in South Africa: these times of critical droughts. These droughts that we have already grown used to in South Africa occur chiefly and more regularly in our semi-desert parts. It is also these parts that consist chiefly of the livestock grazing areas of South Africa. These are widely scattered areas. If we look at the map, we realize that they cover three-quarters of the surface area of the Cape, half of the surface area of the Free State and the whole of the northern part of the Transvaal. Widely scattered over these areas, the small general dealer provides extremely important services to his community. He provides them with vitally necessary remedies, goods such as clothes, food, tools, etc., which the community needs every day. We find them in every town and every small town; we find them in remote hamlets and on isolated farms. Their way of doing business also varies. There is the one-man business, the partnership, a small company and the consumer co-operative. The weal and woe of these business undertakings are in direct proportion to the weal and woe of the farming communities, and the profitability of these undertakings is also chiefly determined by the prosperity of the farming communities. This area's economy is based chiefly on farming, and from the nature of the case a large percentage of these businesses are conducted on a credit basis. In many cases the granting of credit is as high as 80 per cent of their turnover, because the farmers are good clients and they pay up. These clients are sometimes carried for periods of eight months to a year, as a result of the seasonal marketing of the farmers’ products. Can you therefore imagine the position of these business people when droughts continue for four years and longer? Can you imagine how these people feel when there are entreaties from their clients to grant them further credit, and there is no mention at all of paying off their obligations? Can you imagine how these people feel when they see how the solvency of their clients is decreasing every day; when they must see how some of their loyal clients leave them, when they get a small amount of cash, and spend it in the chain stores, because these chain stores operate chiefly on a cash basis? Can you picture how these people feel when they see their own trading capabilities decreasing as a result of the exhaustion of their own capital? Sir, I think it fitting that this committee should pay tribute to this group of people playing a big role in keeping our farming populaion on their feet. This is a group of people that does not enjoy recognition every day, and cannot apply anywhere for assistance. They must simply see how they make out. They fill a great and indispensable role in South Africa’s rural economy. We know that farmers obtain assistance from the State; these people do not obtain assistance. They can only go to their commercial banks, where they must pay the highest interest rates, and with the credit ceilings that there are, these people usually cannot obtain extra credit either. There are no other sources they can approach to assist them in these critical times. My plea is this: Is it not possible for the State to assist these people, in some way or other, with loans on a merit basis, even though it be short-term loans at subsidized interest? These people deserve it, because of the task they are performing in South Africa. I think it is in the interests of our agriculture, and of our country as a whole, that we should try to help these people during this transitional period when these droughts are holding sway. My plea is therefore that the hon. the Minister and his Department should give serious attention to the matter, and should try to work out a scheme to assist these people, thereby also assisting the farmers in this extremely important task they are fulfilling in these critical times.

Then I just want to say a few words about consumer co-operatives. I now that this probably does not fall under the Commerce Vote, but what are consumer co-operatives other than exclusively commercial undertakings? They are not agricultural co-operatives. I know that they fall under the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, under the Department of Agriculture, but their exclusive function is to trade. They developed as a result of the need among consumers to pool their sources for the maximum benefit of the members of these co-operatives. Their endeavour is very praiseworthy, and the service they furnish in various places must not be underestimated. They provide very exceptional services. This helps, in the first place, to keep the cost of living down. I think the department must seriously consider giving more attention to these consumer co-operatives. These people are faced with two outstanding bottlenecks. There are certain restrictive requirements laid down by the Co-operative Societies Act, No. 29 of 1939. I want to advocate that this Act be changed and made more pliable for these consumer co-operatives, even if the Department of Economic Affairs must take these consumer co-operatives under its wing. I think the consumer co-operatives will feel more at home under the Department of Economic Affairs than under the Department of Agriculture. Sir, in the second place these consumer co-operatives have a chronic shortage of capital as a result of their composition. If you have one share in that co-operative you can become a member, and in the majority of cases their loan capital is altogether out of proportion with the ordinary capital of the co-operatives. That is why they are experiencing severe difficulties. I want to advocate that attention be given to whether these consumer co-operatives, which are fulfilling a big function in their respective places, cannot also be assisted by the State in respect of cheaper loan capital. I would appreciate it very much if the Minister could perhaps take this matter up with the Minister of Agriculture.

Sir, there is very little time left for the debate on this Vote, and the hon. member for Vryburg will forgive me if I do not follow up on the direction in which he went, except to say that this side of the House is in such complete agreement with him as far as these representations of his are concerned that he can be certain of our support when he pleads for assistance to traders in remote towns who are all going under because they have lost their custom.

I should like to refer to what the hon. the Minister said in his long speech yesterday when his Vote came under discussion. He said that there was of necessity increased consumption in the country owing to our larger population, and that production would have to be increased, because if this was not done the gap between our exports and our imports could not be eliminated. Sir, it is a source of concern to all of us that although there was an unfavourable difference of R500 million between our imports and exports in the first half of this calendar year, our exports seldom increase and our imports are increasing day by day. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what his solution to this problem is, if it is not increased utilization of our labour resources? I am not talking now about uncontrolled employment, to which an hon. member on that side referred this morning. I have no time to elaborate on that; it is all nonsense. What I mean is sufficient labour so that the industrialist will be able to produce more. A lack of labour is one of the industrialist’s problems, and if our industrialists are no longer able to produce, how can we eventually eliminate the gap between imports and exports? If this gap should ever reach the figure of R1,000 million over a calendar year and our gold production, with which we must partially eliminate the gap, amounts to approximately R700 million, with the result that our reserves decline by R300 million, a red light will come on for the economy of South Africa. How, then, are we going to save our economy if we are not prepared to make more and better use of our labour? I want to agree with the Minister that a large portion of the labour at our disposal is unskilled labour. This is the only solution, and if we do not want to establish training centres where these people can be trained, then we can only train them through employment. In the vast majority of industries the assistant who works alongside the engineer day after day, year after year, eventually becomes as competent as his master. We had better employ these unskilled people therefore and clear the way for increased employment.

Sir, the hon. the Minister dealt with many aspects of his Vote here yesterday, and I should like him to give us a further analysis of this situation and to tell us what he regards as the solution to this problem, apart from increased productivity on the part of white workers, apart from harder work and all the sentimental representations which we have been making towards our industries to produce more. We are also students of human nature and we know that we cannot solve our problem by simply making an appeal to our workers to produce more. The hon. the Minister also said yesterday that if we wanted to establish additional factories and industries, in terms of the Government’s policy of decentralization, we would need more equipment and that more capital would have to be used to import this equipment. As far as I can see our imports will simply keep on increasing in terms of the Government’s policy. How will it be possible to establish more factories if we lack the equipment? There are even problems when it comes to additions to existing factories, in terms of the Government’s policy. It is not even possible to make additions, and factories should preferably be moved to other areas. In other words, it is not so easy for the consolidation of existing units to take place any more. Factories must move to decentralized or border areas, and new equipment and new staff have to be found. The pressure is becoming increasingly heavier on more and more imports, and as far as our production is concerned, it is remaining virtually constant. The production does not increase. If I look at this situation objectively, without making any party political issue of this matter, then I honestly cannot see how industrialists can produce more if they are not allowed to use more labour, skilled or unskilled. They already have to train unskilled labour themselves by means of employment. Sir, I note that my time has almost expired. This is in addition the end of the discussion under this Vote. I would be grateful if the hon. the Minister could not tell us how we are to bridge the large gap between our exports and imports, because that is the most important aspect under the Commerce and Industry Vote.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Parktown put a few questions yesterday and I first want to reply to them. He said that the export industries should be helped to a greater extent, inter alia in respect of labour. I think there is some merit in what the hon. member said. Making something like that applicable will probably present some practical problems, but it is a good idea that consideration should perhaps be given to finding some method, on the basis of the percentage of exports in relation to production, by which exporting companies can be met to a larger extent than other companies in cases of labour shortages.

A seond aspect which was raised by the hon. member and which I would like to discuss, is our trade representation abroad. We must guard against our trade not becoming too sparsely distributed over the world. It is important that our trade representatives should be strong enough to make an impact in the areas which they must serve. Naturally, with our limited manpower, it is not always possible to place as many trade representatives as we would like to do. Apart from that consideration, it also costs us money. However, I want to say to the hon. member that the matter is reviewed from time to time. At the moment our trade representation abroad is again being reviewed. In the near future we shall probably place trade representation at other places in the world as well.

The hon. member said that the private sector should be actively brought into the negotiations with the E.E.C. It would be rather difficult to involve the private sector to such an extent that they would actually take part in the negotiations which will take place with a view to England’s entry to the E.E.C. In this connection, however, I want to give the hon. member the assurance that the Department will remain in contact throughout with all the interested parties. In fact, there are no fewer than 35 industries which are consulted by the Department of Commerce with a view to our negotiations. All that we actually do after that, is to bring our position and our representations to the attention of the countries concerned. It is not so easy to involve the private sector in the negotiations in a practical and direct way. In this connection we will have to learn as time goes by.

The hon. member also referred to gold which we should make available to countries to help them in the transitional period, if I may call it that, with a view to the developments which may take place there. I am afraid that this is purely a matter for the Department of Finance. In the circumstances I should prefer not to risk discussing it at this stage. The hon. member also spoke about the banks. I agree with him that banks play a very large part in the international economy. Personally we attach value to that. It is actually a matter which also belongs to the Department of Finance, but the hon. member is probably aware that we keep in constant touch with the banks. In fact, Dr. Diederichs is overseas at the moment and he will devote more of his time to making contact with the various banks in other parts of the world than he will devote to the I.M.F.

The aspects in regard to the fishing industry were dealt with very effectively by the Deputy Minister, so that there is no need for me to say anything about that.

The hon. member for Vasco spoke about the diamond cutting industry. This is in fact a matter which falls largely under the Department of Mines. He suggested that we should cut larger diamonds here in South Africa and that we should expand the diamond cutting industry here. He especially mentioned the Coloured people who can be trained in that industry. The hon. member is not here now, but I just want to say for the record that it is a matter which is again receiving attention. It is a matter which has been discussed on several previous occasions. At the moment it is again receiving attention.

The hon. member for Smithfield spoke about the minor industries yesterday. I should like to give him the assurance that industrialists who are going to establish themselves in Zastron will be treated with the necessary sympathy and that pioneers in this respect will not be forgotten.

The hon. member for Zululand’s entire speech yesterday was in connection with the problems which the sugar industry is experiencing. The hon. member apologized to me for unfortunately having had to depart earlier this morning, so that he would not be present here. The hon. member has discussed these problems with me before. There is a shortage of trucks. The Railways have their problems in meeting everybody’s needs. As a result the facilities made available to the sugar industry by the Railways have been curtailed. I conducted negotiations this morning, and in this connection I have received a telex message which is quite promising and in which the Railways expressed the opinion that soon, or as soon as possible, they would return to the 25 per cent curtailment. Until now it has been the position that there has been a curtailment of 25 per cent. The sugar industry has to a large extent made adjustments in order to bridge this. It seems as though the Railways will find the means to return to a curtailment of 25 per cent. I shall be glad if this will be possible.

The hon. member for Ermelo spoke about the small businessman. I want to give him the assurance that we are also concerned about the survival of the small and the medium-size businessman. Therefore the Government has already approved the provision of financial aid for the establishment of a bureau, which will function under the auspices of the University of Potchefstroom, in order to protect and promote the interests of the small and the medium-size businessman.

The hon. member for East London (North) spoke about East London. It seemed to me that he was not quite satisfied. Yesterday I actually singled out East London as one of the places which has benefited greatly from the Government’s border industries policy. I thought that if there was one member who should not be dissatisfied, it would be that hon. member. However, he is apparently very ambitious, because he said that we should not establish those smaller industries in East London. He said that we should simply establish a fourth Iscor there. Sir, this is ambition for you! I should like to read an item from the Permanent Committee’s report to the hon. member. This report covers the period from 1st January to 30th June, 1970. It has not yet been made available and consequently the hon. member did not have it at his disposal. They write as follows about the Berlin area near East London—(translation):

I think the hon. member should be very satisfied with the conditions prevailing there.

The hon. member for Heidelberg spoke about Sasol. As one can of course expect, he said that if another Sasol was erected, Heidelberg should be taken into consideration. He also referred to the scientists and to the by-products, which play a very large part in this major industry. I have taken the necessary cognizance of that.

The hon. member for Simonstown spoke about the fishing industry. I think this has already been replied to adequately.

The hon. member for Berea spoke about funeral undertakers. This is a matter which he has raised in this House on several previous occasions. I must admit that I have a measure of sympathy with his argument, because I know that when you go to buy a coffin, you are in no mood to argue about its price. But apart from this, if you were to argue about the price, you might create the impression that you are mot showing the necessary respect towards the deceased that is expected of you. All these circumstances create an atmosphere which makes it very possible for the undertaker—I would not like to exaggerate—perhaps to take advantage of the situation.

Not “perhaps”; they are doing it.

There we have another hon. member saying that they are in fact doing this. It is as a result of these circumstances that I say I have sympathy with the hon. member’s arguments. But the hon. member will remember that in 1968 we instituted an inquiry into the costs. This inquiry revealed that according to the standards of price control and price application, no exceptional profits were being taken in the undertakers’ trade. This is where we stand at the moment. I have a letter in front of me which was written to that hon. member on 21st November, 1968, and which deals with this question fully. Because I have sympathy with his case, I should like to ask him to let me have the information which he bas. I want to give him the assurance that we will institute a thorough investigation in this connection.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Lydenburg made a speech here for which I should like to thank him. I think he made a real contribution yesterday evening and again this morning.

He rather struggled this morning.

No, that is not true. The hon. member spoke about the Government’s policy and its application and I think he made a very valuable contribution. With reference to his speech, I just want to say that we in South Africa do not fully appreciate what facilities we have at our disposal. We have valuable facilities. I concede that although the price of labour is not very high in South Africa, one cannot say that labour is cheap. I know that the industrialists agree with me in this respect.

It is not efficient.

But these are circumstances which we have not created for ourselves and which we have to accept. The labour is available. It lives with us. We do not pay much for it, but it is not cheap either, because we do not get much value from it. To link up with what the hon. member said, I want to say that I feel that if politics did not play such a large part in the implementation of our economic policy, the industrialists and all of us would have been able to derive more benefit with the implementation of the policy of this Government. We accept the policy of decentralization, but surely it is obvious that if we could face our problems with greater co-operation and in a more open-minded way, without taking into account our political prejudice, much greater success could be achieved in the industrial development of South Africa.

You must tell the Cabinet that.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) spoke about the iron ore export scheme. The difference between that hon. member and me is that he must speak as the member for Port Elizabeth (Central) and must approach and analyse the problem in that spirit. Over against that, I represent none of these areas. Therefore I am in a better position to weigh up the advantages and the disadvantages objectively. What upset me in the hon. member’s performance was the measure of venom with which, and, in fact, the ill-mannered way in which he referred to Iscor. It is a responsible organization which is only trying to do its best for South Africa. It is an organization which cannot operate on a small scale, but which must operate on a large scale. The hon. member created the impression that the decision between Saldanha and Port Elizabeth was simply taken in a superficial way. I argued this question with the hon. member for Parktown yesterday. I do not want to analyse the advantages and the disadvantages of the various schemes again, but the hon. member may rest assured that searching studies were made and that all the necessary information was submitted to the Cabinet before the decision was taken. To me the most important consideration in the case of a scheme such as we are envisaging is that if Port Elizabath were decided upon, we would in fact be in a “straitjacket”. We would land in a cul de sac. because those who are in favour of it as well as those who are against it, all admit that it will only be possible to use Port Elizabeth up to a certain quantity of exports. This is so because the railway line limits it. We already have problems with that railway line. On the other hand. such a scheme at Saldanha will open the road to the future and unlimited quantities will be made available to us.

But a railway line has to be built.

Yes, a railway line has to be built, but apart from the consideration of quantities, what will this new railway line not mean to South Africa if at the same time it can be used economically with these ore exports? According to all the information at our disposal, the costs will rise much more rapidly in Port Elizabeth as the quantities to be exported increase. When more than 15 million tons a year is reached, it will be more expensive than it will be in the case of the Saldanha scheme. According to the information, such a scheme at Port Elizabeth will not be able to handle 20 million tons a year. I do not even want to talk about the sea conditions. I have technical advice in front of me according to which no proper investigation was made of the circumstances at Port Elizabeth at all. I do not wish to cast aspersions on Port Elizabeth’s climatic conditions, but we know that Port Elizabeth is a fairly windy place. We also know—at least, this is what we have been told —that the swells in the sea around there can change within half an hour from nothing to a height of 30 ft. In addition, we have no information as yet about sub-surface currents. Under the circumstances, this whole matter was referred to the Hydrology Institute of the C.S.I.R. at the University of Stellenbosch. The official who devoted attention to the matter there, collected certain data which I want to read to you (translation)—

On the basis of this official’s first conclusion, we must accept that full observations will have to be made for another year or two, and preferably for an even longer period. From 9 to 12 months are required for model studies of wave refraction. He also recommended that tests be carried out with model boats in order to study the handling of large ships. This will bring the total time required for model studies, to one and a half to two years. I have mentioned these matters just to point out the technical problems of that scheme, problems about which the hon. member spoke as if they were nothing—everything is fine; you can simply go there and start loading. This is a very small island where the loading must take place. In fact, some of the ships will be larger than the island itself. My own standpoint, however, is not based on these technical considerations, but more on economic considerations. It is true, as the hon. member said, that Saldanha is not a deep-sea harbour. But the sea-bed there is not hard, so that dredging work can be done at very little cost.

Continually.

Saldanha is the most natural harbour in South Africa. And now we can develop it in this way. But I know the hon. member has his own reasons for adopting his standpoint. The Cabinet has no doubt about which scheme is the most suitable.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Central) concluded on a very strange note. He said that we should not work too hard because it is not good for our health.

I spoke about working harder.

I wonder how many hon. members agree with that hon. member.

The hon. member for Paarl referred to the amount of R100 appearing on the Vote. I just want to say to him that payments in regard to exports in the previous financial year have not yet been finalized. Small payments to exporters, including the grapefruit canning factory in Swaziland—that country’s production is marketed as an integral part of the South African production—will have to be made during the current financial year. For this reason the nominal amount of R100 was included in the Estimates.

The hon. member also spoke about the inclusion of the K.W.V., the Deciduous Fruit Board and the canning industry. In this regard my reply is more or less the same as that which I gave to the hon. member for Parktown. These are the main bodies consulted by us. As a matter of fact, representatives of the Deciduous Fruit Board came to see me in my office only yesterday morning to discuss the problems which they are experiencing.

The hon. member for Gardens referred to the pollution of the sea. My Department is already giving attention to this matter. I agree with the hon. member that we should give proper attention to the pollution of the sea and of the air. In this connection I shall go to the Cabinet in due course with proposals on how to combat pollution more effectively.

The hon. member for North Rand spoke about Phalaborwa. The hon. member is, of course, aware that there has been tremendous expansion at Phalaborwa and that until now it has been centred around the copper and fertilizer industries. The development which has taken place there has centred around these two industries to a large extent. The local authority there asked that facilities be provided for the establishment of industries. The matter was investigated and the Government has decided that the necessary facilities should be created there. Admittedly, there have not been many applications yet, but the facilities should nevertheless be there for the industries to develop. I myself went there recently and drove around in the industrial area. All the facilities are already there. There are still certain hitches, certain unattractive features, but these will be ironed out and the necessary industries attracted in the course of time.

The amount of R1,000 to which the hon. member referred, is an amount for studies, the type of study which will enable us to determine for which industries it is essential to remain within the metropolitan areas and for which industries it will be possible to move to border areas. This type of study is necessary.

The hon. member for Vryburg discussed about the consumer co-operatives. Unfortunately he and I do not hold the same views on this matter. It is, however, a wide subject. As far as our businesses are concerned, we believe that we should make it available on a free basis. A business must not compete with other similar businesses on an unequal basis. There are other aspects of these consumer corporations which worry me. It happens so often that persons who do not have the necessary experience of these businesses, are in charge of them and must indicate the direction to be followed, with the result that so many failures occur. I therefore have some misgivings, but I still think it can be a fruitful discussion if one can talk about this matter further.

The hon. member for East London (City)— and I want to conclude with this—spoke about our balance of trade position in as far as it is affected by the larger imports as against the smaller exports, and he asked what we should do. I personally do not have all the solutions to the problem. The hon. member himself can probably make a large contribution, but in the first place I think we must do the one thing and not neglect the other. I think we can try to import less and to export more. Now I must admit that our imports are largely capital goods and not consumer goods as such, but one needs capital goods in a growing country like South Africa, and therefore one must be careful in restricting the import of capital goods. In regard to consumer goods. I think we should again think of holding a “Buy South African Week” or something like that. Our people—I am afraid this is a malady found among all people in the world—are inclined to think that an article manufactured here in South Africa is not as good as the imported article. This is not always true.

I do not say there are no exceptions, but I am certain that it is not always true, and often when a South African buys an imported article because he thinks it is better, he can buy a similar article which has been manufactured in South Africa and is of better quality, at a cheaper price. I think we can perhaps do something to revive the spirit in South Africa that we should buy South African if at all possible. In regard to exports, I think all of us, except the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (City), agree that we can work harder, and that we should not only work harder, but also make more productive use of the time for which the employer pays. In the times in which we are living, with the long period of prosperity, it is undoubtedly the position that one adopts a careless attitude to one’s output in the time for which one is paid. In the second place, I think we should try to buy less. We can manage with less. I am aware that salaries are high and that even higher salaries are always being called for, but I think we should try to buy less, and if you were to ask me what the people should then do with the money, my reply would be that they must save, because it is in fact in respect of savings in South Africa that we have such a problem. Not enough is being saved in South Africa for our capital needs. If the hon. member wants to do something now he can try to propagate these points. In regard to labour—this is not really the occasion to discuss labour—I said yesterday that we should use our skilled labour for the work which really demands skilled workers and that we should train and push up the unskilled workers as much as possible. Then we will be able to use our labour more effectively.

I should like to thank hon. members for the good discussion of these Votes. We are all aware of the value of the Department of Economic Affairs. I think it is in fact such an interesting subject and such an interesting department because one can see with one’s own eyes the results of the things about which one talks. It always gives one more satisfaction when one can see the results of one’s labour with one’s own eyes. Therefore I want to express the confidence that the contributions which were made there from all sides of this House, will serve to build up the important pillar of the expansion of our fatherland by means of its economic development.

Votes put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 40.—“Police”, R94,288,000:

I do not propose at this stage to ask for the privilege of the half-hour, because we have so many hon. members here who have important contributions to make to this debate. I would like to start with the Police Report. If one looks at this Report it is a kaleidoscope, if I may say so, of South African life. It deals with anything from terrorists on the border to finding lost children. When one looks at this report, one appreciates the nature of the work which the S.A. Police have to do in South Africa. The nature of their work cannot be compared with the work done by and the salaries paid to other persons employed by the State. In the first place, they have a responsibility which no other public servant has, from the very beginning. They have full responsibility from the moment they join the Force. Most of the public servants only have full responsibility near the end of their career. They have to work 24 hours a day and it is seldom appreciated that when policemen have investigated crime and have to give evidence in court, that court time comes off their own time and still have to go on duty that evening and they do not get any overtime for it. In the third place, there is the danger to which they are exposed and, in the nature of things, the temptations to which they are exposed are such that, as the hon. member for Green Point indicated in the debate on the Interior Vote, the question of the payment and the conditions of service of the Police should be divorced from the Public Service Commission so that and, like the Post Office, they should have their own staff board to determine these matters. I hope the hon. the Minister is going to indicate that he will press for this to come about.

Sir, the Force is a very wholesome unit. It has a discipline and a code of ethics and a cohesion which are very wholesome and satisfying. There are obviously black sheep. Everyone has his black sheep, but the Force is to be congratulated, by and large, on the way they themselves deal with these persons. When this question of Constable Marais arose, this person who was found guilty of common assault, having been charged with murder together with someone else, the allegation being that he and the farmer bad beaten three Bantu prisoners of whom one, a woman, died, although it could not be established that she died as the result of the beating and as a result were found guilty of common assault, this received tremendous publicity; and then we had to press the hon. the Minister to give us an answer why it was that he was being retained in the Force: and it was only after two questions were asked in the House that we were able to get a reply. I indicated then that I would raise the matter under his Vote. What I wanted to raise was this question that the hon. the Minister, by being secretive about matters such as this, does the police themselves a great disservice and does the public a great disservice. It is of great public importance that one should know why policemen are retained in the Service under these circumstances. Now, the hon. the Minister has given those reasons at last, but I wish to impress upon him that we always have to squeeze in formation out of him. As I say, it is in the interest of the Police themselves and of the public that information should be given to the public so that there can be no question as to why persons are retained in the Force and why they are not being retained.

The discipline of the Force does not seem to be applied to the Security Police. I have a strong impression that they do more or less what they like and are not subject to the discipline of the Force as other members of it are. There are examples of misdeeds on their part, as the result perhaps of this, which will be dealt with during the course of this debate, particularly the most documented one there is, the case of the Imam, which will be dealt with by the hon. member for Wynberg in detail.

One is pleased to find that in the last year the S.A. Police have taken the step of appointing non-white officers. There are now Coloured officers with the same rank as any other officer in the Force. This is a most encouraging sign. I feel at this stage that it is perhaps necessary to say that this is being done by the Force itself and that this is a matter which concerns the Force. It is not a matter which really concerns anyone else as to who salutes who, and who takes orders from whom. I think this is a matter we can confidently leave to the Force itself to handle; it needs no comment from us.

The crime rate has increased. The increase in violent crimes is mentioned in this report. On page 9 there appears the following, referring to the increase in violent crimes—

And I underline the word “few”—

I emphasize the word “long”—

I read this to mean that the complaint is that a number of these persons who were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment, have been released prematurely and that this is a cause of the increase in violent crime. I had occasion to mention this to the hon. the Minister of Prisons when his Vote was before us, but we received no reply from him. I wonder whether the Minister will indicate whether this is in fact the experience of the Police that these persons are being released far too early, and that persons who received long sentences of imprisonment for crimes of violence are now, under the policy of the Department of Prisons and because of the overcrowding in the prisons, or for other reasons, being released too early and then pursue their old habits again.

The whole question of what the police are paid, etc., will be dealt with in detail by other hon. members on this side of the House during the course of this debate, but one of the most frightening aspects of this Police Report is the number of people who leave of their own accord every year. Take 1969. The number of people who left of their own accord was 1,952, of whom 66.5 per cent left after serving in the Force for three years. This is a most distressing thing to find, that after that period, when they have been trained and are more than valuable members of the Force, they leave. The only reason for it can be the conditions of work and the payment given to members of the Force. There can be no other reason for it. I think the hon. the Minister will be surprised when he hears the comparisons of pay not only between what the police are paid and what private undertakings will pay, but the difference in pay for policemen in the S.A. Police as compared with policemen in the Railway Police Force. These are matters that we have discussed every year, and the time has surely come now when something must be done We hope the hon. the Minister is with us in our attempt to have the Police Force taken away from the Public Service Commission and given its own staff organization, like the Post Office.

The hon. member for Durban (North) will pardon me if I do not follow up on all the points he raised here. I will not reply on the Marais matter, because I know very little about it. Nevertheless, the hon. member for Durban (North) alleged here that the work of the Police is not the same as the work in other sectors of the Public Service. I agree wholeheartedly with him. This is correct. For example, they are not paid any overtime. They have dangerous work and are linked to the Public Service Commission to which they are subject, with the result that their salaries, etc., are adjusted to the rest of the Public Service Commission to which they are subject, with the result that their salaries, etc., are adjusted to the rest of the Public Service. Have the salaries of the S.A. Police increased in relaionship to those of the rest of the private sector, or have they remained static? There was a general salary increase on 1st October, 1958, and for the purpose of this argument I am going to use that as a base. Since 1st October 1958, up to the present, there has been an average percentage increase for all white ranks of 49.089 per cent. The salaries of the S.A. Police have increased by between 46 and 47 per cent. It is interesting to note that salaries in the private sector of the economy have increased by 55 per cent. In other words, the salaries of the S.A. Police have not increased in the same ratio as salaries in the private sector. That is why the Public Service cannot compete with the private sector. But it is interesting to note that while the salaries of the S.A. Police have been increased by between 46 and 47 per cent; the cost of living have increased during the same period by 34.3 per cent; it is very important to take note of this. I do not want to make the assertion here today that the S.A. Police Force are being adequately remunerated. I accept that they are doing very important and very dangerous work. I myself, and I am certain all members on this side of the House, should also like to advocate increased salaries for the S.A. Police, because the S.A. Police cannot be compared with other sectors of the Public Service. I therefore want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that he should ensure, if possible, that the salaries of the S.A. Police be increased slightly. Sir, then there are also other adjustments which have to be made to the salary scales. We find for example that a senior sergeant earns approximately R3,900 per year, while a junior lieutenant earns R7,760 and a junior captain R3,600, R300 less than the senior sergeant. Here we therefore have an overlapping of salary scales, and I think that this matter should be restored to its correct perspective. But I leave it at that, Sir.

I should just like to dwell briefly on the housing problem of the S.A. Police, about which a great deal has also been said an this House. Since the Department of Community Development began to assist in supplying housing to the S.A. Police—I think with effect from April, 1968—the position has begun to improve slightly. The Department of Public Works and the Department of Community Development between them are now supplying the housing needs of the S.A. Police, but there is nevertheless a tremendous shortage still. We can divide the housing problems of the S.A. Police Force into four categories. There is the first group, who receive 100 per cent loans; this is the privileged group. They pay only interest on the capital they have borrowed. These people are satisfied I must say that I do not agree with this arrangement because the S.A. Police Force is a mobile force and members of the Force can be transferred at any time. That is why it is of the utmost importance that we should attempt to establish 100 per cent departmental housing for the Police Force—I believe that this is the policy of the present Minister as well as the Government—in such a way that when a member of the Force is transferred, he will have housing at his disposal in the centre to which he has been transferred. I know of quite a number of members of the Police Force who have even, under the present system, purchased houses and who have eventually, when they were transferred, had to sell those houses at a loss, or otherwise refuse the transfer with its promotion. In principle, therefore, this system is not in the best interests of a member of the Force who is really ambitious. We know that at present housing is also being supplied where new police stations are being built, but at the old police stations there is a tremendous deficiency in regard to housing. I feel that we must remedy this matter so that there will be no discrimination against members of the S.A. Police Force. The second group consists of young men who get married after three years and who do not have enough money to pay the first instalment and the transfer fees. Then there is the third group who bought their own houses and who have over the years paid off the purchase price either partially or in full. Those two groups are not being subsidized. Then we find the fourth group, and that is the group who are living in barracks, which is a very sound basis in respect of the S.A. Police Force because those young men are living together and when their services are required they are readily available for police service. They are not enjoying the privilege of subsidization either. For that reason, since the Police Force is the symbol of South African security, I think we must see to it that every possible step is taken to adjust the salary scales and to remedy the housing problems of the S.A. Police Force to such an extent that all members of the Force can be satisfied.

Mr. Chairman, this annual report of the Police is a most interesting document but it is a typical Police report; it is cold and factual. It does not tell you about the agony and the ecstasy of the men, the blood, sweat, toil, tears and human endeavour behind it. Significantly, it starts off by telling us that there was a change of command. Secondly, it goes on to set out the Roll of Honour. To my mind this is a most significant paragraph. The report starts off by informing the people of South Africa that 13 white policemen and 18 non-Whites were killed in the execution of duty. Sir, people must realize that these men were killed in action, in other words, in the service of South Africa. I want to point this out to show the inherent dangers which attend their work day and night and every day of the year. Then under the heading “Honourable mention and Awards” we are told that the S.A. Police Star for Distinguished Service was awarded to three lieutenant-generals. Sir, although I do not want to get involved in a polemic regarding awards and decorations, I would like to issue a note of warning that we should not look upon these awards as automatic awards upon reaching a certain stage of seniority.

How many medals have you got?

We then come to the S.A. Police Star for Merit, which was awarded to 135 Whites and 33 non-Whites, and, thirdly, we come to the S.A. Police Medal for Faithful Service a coveted medal which was awarded to 252 Whites and 111 non-Whites. We are then informed that six white and ten non-white members were commended for exceptional devotion to duty, courage and perseverence displayed in the execution of their duties. Whilst I congratulate all the members of the force on having earned these decorations and awards, I want to say that I am sure that there are still many more members of the Force who, if the true facts of certain cases had come to light, would have been recommended for accommendation as well. But, Sir, this is due to a human failing for which no Minister can be held responsible. It is always a question of a man’s personal view as to whether he has been amply rewarded or not. But all this goes to show that the S.A. Police always has been and still is South Africa’s first line of defence. Sir, whilst I am talking about medals and awards, I am thinking of those men who are beyond our boundaries, outside South African territory, waging what I maintain is a war against terrorists. I would like to make a plea here to the Minister to think of having a special medal cast for them and to have it done soon. It is no good giving such medals to these men five or ten years afterwards. Let us give these medals to them now while the enthusiasm is there, so that we do not lose their services after they have completed their period of service Up North.

The report then goes on to deal with the establishment of the Force, and we are informed that the Police Force is 2,535 under strength. Sir, this is a very sad figure. This figure of 2,535 is made up of 2,046 Whites and 489 non-Whites. In spite of this shortage, the Police Force still performed its duties and functions creditably and, I say without fear of contradiction, satisfactorily throughout the year, as it always has done. Apart from maintaining and preserving internal security, maintaining law and order, investigating alleged offences and crimes and preventing crime, it still had to supply men to serve beyond our borders to suppress terrorist activities. Sir, what startles me is to read at the end of the report about the vast number of hours on extraneous duties performed by the Police, in spite of the shortages and in spite of the multifarious nature of their duties. We are told in the report that the Police spent 919,600 manhours on extraneous duties! Sir, do you realize that this is equivalent to 114,950 shifts of eight hours? When you break it down, this means that 315 men are employed every day of the year on duties for other Departments. Sir, this is a state of affairs which the Police cannot afford and it is time something was done to enable the other Departments to carry their own babies instead of asking the Police to help them out when they are short of staff. I do not want to dwell on this but I know only too well what it means when the Police at their own cost have to help other Departments. Sir, what is the reward received by members of the Force for serving their country? We have heard the hon. member for Aliwal talk about the poor pay of the police, about the anomalies in pay and the fact that they are not paid overtime. I agree with him. I suppose that I know more than most members in this House about how the police work. When we come to pay anomalies, we find that a sergeant in the Railway Police starts off at R2,020 whereas a sergeant in the S.A. Police starts at only R1,560. Admittedly, he overtakes the man in the Railway Police in due course and goes up to R3,600. A warrant officer in the S.A. Police starts with a salry of R2,040 and the salary scale goes up to R3,900, whereas a warrant officer in the Railway Police starts with a salary of R3,800 and progresses to R3,900. In the meantime the position in the Army has also improved its pay structure and a warrant officer, first grade, now has a salary scale which goes up to R4,650 per annum. This supersedes by far the position of a lieutenant in the S.A.P. The salary is also higher than that paid to a captain in the Police Force and it is only R150 short of the top salary paid to a major. These are burning questions amongst Policemen. They are not blind to these facts and I should like to ask the Minister to do everything in his power in this regard. We know that these anomalies have arisen because the Police Force has to fit in with the Public Service Commission. This has caused considerable dissatisfaction among policemen. The salary adjustments were made on 1st October, last year, and the men are still grumblig about it. They are loyal. They are serving South Africa and they will continue to serve South Africa because they are dedicated. They are not prepared to flaunt their complaints all over the place. They do not write to the Press, or anything like that. I implore members of this House to give the Minister their full support in order to bring about a break from the Public Service Commission, which has been a stranglehold on the Police for all these years as far as salaries are concerned.

The question of more housing has been referred to by the hon. member for Aliwal. I should like to refer to some of the barracks for single men. Many of these old barracks are situated in unsavoury localities. I am thinking, for example, of Fordsburg in Johannesburg, where we find a body of young men, good solid South Africans, stuck in the middle of a non-white complex. I admit that they are not very far from the centre of town, but to go to and from town they have to pass through an unsavoury part of the city. Not all of them own motor cars and the bus services are not what they should be. I do feel that something special should be done to find these men better quarters so that they can enjoy the amenities which are open to the average young south African man. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umlazi has just paid tribute to the Police. I was actually a little surprised for, judging from the questions the Opposition usually put to the Minister during question time, it always seems to me as if the work of the Police is not being appreciated. Sir, we are living in a post-war period when authority is being defied. Authority is sometimes even being challenged. We are living in a time of drug-taking and abuse of liquor. All these evils are rampant. That is why it is with great appreciation that we take cognisance of the work the South African Police are doing, at home as well as in regard to the combatting of threats from abroad. I would even say that the Police to-day have to cope with the failures of parents, teachers, ministers and even the community. We find this throughout the world. The Police have to cope with these people. That is why it is surprising to see, according to the report, how many assaults are carried out on the Police. This proves again that the task of the Police is not such an easy one. What makes the position even more difficult is the fact that the Police are the administrators of every little piece of real or contentious legislation in every Act. Every contentious part of every Act must be administered by the Police. It is then that one takes cognisance, with great appreciation, of the work they are doing.

I should like to express my gratitude and appreciation towards the men who are rendering service on our borders. We are all talking about them. We are all proud of these people, but there is one group of people whom we are forgetting and of whom we cannot make sufficient mention. They are the families of these men on the borders. Whether it is the parents of such a man, his brothers or his sisters, or whether it is his wife and children, these people are also making great sacrifices in that these men in the Force have to render service on the borders. I should also like to praise these people, because they are living under tension. This one cannot dispute. They are living, in the service of South Africa, under tension and in suspense, from day to day and night after night.

I want to make haste and come to my next point. This is the question of the Reserve Force. I am pleased to see that as far as Whites are concerned, there are 16,430 men who are in their spare time rendering service to their country in the Police Force. I want to propose to the Minister, however, that these people should at some stage or other receive recognition or an award for faithful service. I want to venture a suggestion in this connection. While Police in the Permanent Force receive such a recognition after eighteen years, these people ought to receive it after a period of ten or twelve years. It is in fact in their spare time that they make this sacrifice to be of service to South Africa. Apart from the other qualifications of exemplariness, of good service, etc., should consideration be given not only to the number of years served by such a person, but perhaps to the number of hours? We know that there are some of these people who work long hours. There are others who work shorter hours. I would say that we could base our calculations on an average figure of 200 to 300 hours per year. We would also like to express our gratitude and appreciation towards the families of these men who are active in the Reserve Police Force.

Mr. Chairman, as the hon. member for Durban (North) pointed out, I am going to deal almost exclusively with the question of the late Imam Abdullah Haron. He was a former editor of the Muslim News and was the twelfth detainee since 1963 to die in Police cells while held by the Security Police. I want to remind the House of the sequence of events regarding this case. In the first place he was arrested by Security Branch officers on 28th May, last year, in terms of sections 6 and 7 of the Terrorism Act. In the first week of June his widow came to see me. She was very distressed and she asked me whether there was anything I could do to help or whether there was any advice I could give her. On the 10th June last year, in response to an Order Paper question from me, the hon. the Minister confirmed the arrest and said that no charge was pending against Haron or against anyone else in connection with the case. On the 13th June last year I tabled another question about the conditions under which this man was being held. As the hon. the Minister knows, he himself has ultimate control of these conditions in terms of sections 6 and 7 of the Terrorism Act. The Minister’s reply to me on that occasion was that he had given no specific instructions regarding Haron’s treatment in detention, as he was quite satisfied and I quote:

I wonder how long they remained appropriate. I think that is open to very serious doubt. The hon. the Miniser has really shown no interest or concern about this case, as far as I can see, despite the tragic events that subsequently ensued.

Shame on you!

No, I say that quite advisedly in view of the delay that has taken place. By September the 27th last year, the Imam was dead. I was in the United Kingdom at the time and quite by chance I happened to read a long account of the case, Which was purely factual, in the London Times and in the Daily Telegraph. The only remotely redeeming feature which the British Press could find in giving the facts of the case at the time of his death, was that a member of the Parliamentary Opposition had questioned the Minister about the Imam’s detention. On the 28th of September the Head of the Security Police of the Western Cape, Col. C. S. J. Pienaar, said that Haron appeared to have died from natural causes, but that the details could not be disclosed until an inquest had been held. The very next day Col. Pienaar made another statement in which he said that there would be no inquest, if laboratory tests showed that Haron had died of natural causes. Three months later, on the 1st December, Col. Pienaar said that as a result of the post-mortem, investigations had begun with a view to an inquest. These investigations, which could have involved—I do not say necessarily did—either the possibility of a criminal charge or an inquest, were carried out by the same Security officers who were already involved in the case. I consider this to be a shocking procedure. Four and a half months after the post-mortem, on the 13th February, the hon. the Minister announced that an inquest would be held on the 18th February, in reply to a question of mine in this House. He went on to say that there had been no delay in this case. Four and a half months passed from the date of the post-mortem to that of the inquest. It really is extraordinary that it took so long. On the 11th March a Cape Town magistrate, Mr. J. S. P. Kuhn, found that Haron had died from a decreased flow of blood to the heart with blood clotting and a severe narrowing of the coronary artery. I quote what he said:

Between the 11th and 18th of March after the inquest findings were known, various calls were made by various newspapers and by myself asking for a top level inquiry into the facts of this case. On the 19th March Major-General D. A. Bester, who is Head of the C.I.D. in South Africa, instructed the head of the C.I.D. in the Western Cape, Col. Lamprecht, to make further investigations into the death of Haron in order to “ascertain whether certain alleged injuries were to be attributed to a criminal offence”. On the 1st April the Imam’s widow, Mrs. Galiena Haron, sued the Ministers of Police and Justice for R22,000 damages. This civil action is still pending, as the hon. the Minister knows. On the 20th July I asked the Minister whether a criminal charge was pending as a result of Police investigations into the circumstances of the Imam’s death, to which the Minister replied that, although Police investigations were completed, the papers could not be handed to the Attorney-General as he was away on long leave. As a result of Press inquiries, it turned out that he did not come back until the 14th September, which in fact was this week. On the 1st September I asked why the Deputy Attorney-General could not handle the case to which the hon. the Minister replied that the Attorney-General himself had directed that “the matter be referred personally to him for a decision”. By last week, as far as we know, he had not even received the papers with regard to this case.

So, we have the situation that just under 12 months after this man’s death under highly suspicious circumstances, there is still no sign of any action being taken to clarify the facts. In the meantime the doubt and suspicion in the public’s mind have considerably increased. There can be no doubt about that. Other people, whose views about the Government and its policies are well-known, live in perpetual fear of similar treatment being meted out to them at some stage as a result of this case. That is a fact.

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

Afternoon Sitting

Mr. Chairman, the chief police witness, Maj. Genis, the security officer in the case I was dealing with before the House adjourned testified that the Imam Haron was detained from 28th May to 11th August in a cell in Cape Town. During that period Maj. Genis told the inquest—

Asked who the other members of the Police Force were who interrogated the Imam Haron, Genis replied—

It is very strange that he does not know who they are. I leave that there for the moment. Maj. Genis testified that Haron was interrogated from the 28th May, to 11th August, namely for the best part of 76 days, or 2½ months, with short intervals, for 7½ hours every single day. No wonder the man became a nervous wreck. This is the kind of thing you would expect in communist prisons and not in ours. [Interjections.] Maj. Genis admitted under cross-examination that a written statement was finally obtained on 11th July, from Haron. Although only one statement was obtained, yet he was still being held by the 27th September, when he died. Counsel in the case stated at the inquest—

Both Maj. Genis and Sgt. van Wyk described how on the 19th September, when they had cross-examined Haron, he fell down some stairs whilst on the way back to his cell. What is interesting to note here is that the Police evidence was first that he fell down the last few stairs only, secondly that he fell down on his back to the bottom of the stairs, and thirdly that he made no complaint of being injured in the fall to either policemen, both of whom accompanied him after that back to the Police cells at Maitland. There is a further very important point. Maj. Genis admitted in evidence that it was possible that Haron during this period could have been alone with Sgt. Andries van Wyk while he himself was busy answering a telephone call or attending to some other duties. Now, I want to know from the hon. the Minister what part did Sgt. Andries van Wyk’s brother, Spyker van Wyk, have in all of this? He is listed amongst the security officers who were personally involved. I want to tell the House that my information from confidential sources is that Sgt. Andries van Wyk was involved in the assault upon the prisoner and that this assault was directly responsible for the subsequent decline in his physical condition during the last week of his life which finally led to the Imam’s death on the 27th September. If this is so, I should like to know from the hon. the Minister whether there is any charge pending for culpable homicide against him or any of the officers involved. Why were the other officers involved in this interrogation not called upon to give evidence at the inquest? This is the vital question. The hon. the Minister said in this House that it would have been la duplication of evidence already given. I entirely disagree. Why was Maj. Dirk Genis, the security officer in charge of this case, transferred to Bloemfontein almost immediately after Haron’s death? Why were two other detainees under the Terrorism Act linked with Haron’s case released without explanation almost immediately after his death? I allege further that both Det. Sgt. J. F. P. van Wyk and Maj. Genis were aware of the situation, namely that the Imam had been assaulted, and were directly responsible for covering up the facts. During those hours of interrogation throughout June, July and August, one wonders whether Det. Sgt. J. F. P. van Wyk and Maj. Genis’ conduct was always lawful on those occasions.

Now, Andries Van Wyk was never called upon to give evidence. Why not? Who made the decision that he would not give evidence in the first place? I will tell you. The decision was made jointly by Lt.-Col. Pienaar, head of security in the Western Cape, and by Maj. Genis, the officer in charge of the case. The inquest began on the 18th February and was adjourned to March 8th. The finding was handed down on 10th March, 5½ months after his death. Medical evidence was that the Imam had 28 bruises all over his body, a haematoma, that is a swelling containing blood, on his back and a broken rib which the State pathologist stated in his evidence appeared to be about a week old. The Police evidence was that the man had fallen downstairs although this evidence about his falling down the stairs was only produced after a great deal of cross-examination at the inquest. They never saw fit to mention it at any other stage during the case. Medical evidence was that all the injuries could not have been caused by a fall, and some of the bruises were a great deal fresher than others. It seems to me to be very strange indeed that whereas this prisoner had twice before been taken to a district surgeon when he complained of pain, why did the Police themselves visit him three times at the Maitland Police cells “just to see if he is all right”, as they put it in the evidence, during the last week of his life, during which period I allege the assault took place? Why did they not take him on that occasion to a District Surgeon? They prescribed pills themselves which the one Police officer even fetched from his own home and gave to him personally. If they went three times to see if he was all right, were they not a little bit jittery at that stage as to what had happened to this man? I suggest that they were. Counsel maintained that although his wife and his family called regularly from May the 28th …

Mr. Chairman, I am only rising to give the hon. member an opportunity to complete her speech.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I will not be very long, but it is an important fact. Counsel maintained that although his wife or a member of his family had called regularly since the 28th May for his dirty linen to take it home and to bring back clean linen, it is very significant that on the 18th September and on the 25th September, the last vital week of his life, the member of his family who came to collect the linen so that it could be taken away and washed, was refused permission to collect it, on instructions from the Security Police. The clear implication is that during those few days, the days when I alleged Haron had been assaulted, there was either blood on his clothes or they were torn or there was some reason why his family was not permitted to take the clothes away and to wash them. There are a number of puzzling discrepancies which were revealed while evidence was being led by counsel at the inquest. The former senior State pathologist in Cape Town, Dr. Schwär, who carried out the original post-mortem examination after Haron’s death on 28th September, in reply to questions by Professor L. C. Smith, the present senior State pathologist in Cape Town who sat as an assessor at the inquest, said that two parallel longitudinal bruises were on the Imam’s body were similar to injuries which had been seen on assault victims who had been assaulted by an instrument such as a stick. It came out in the course of the medical evidence that one of the bruises was eight inches long and four inches wide. That is a very big bruise and there was another that was four inches by three inches, another four inches by 2½ inches. All these were enormous bruises. They appeared on his chest, on the front of his legs, on the back of his legs, on his back and on his side.

This is the sort of situation to which detention under section 6 of the Terrorism Act appears to give rise. I maintain that this is an abuse of Police power. I think the hon. member for Durban (North) was entirely correct when he said that the Security Police appear to be a law unto themselves in this matter. It should not be forgotten that neither these detainees, nor any member of the general public, has any redress whatsoever in a case of this kind. The courts are eliminated and so is all access to his family, to lawyers and so on. I would like to say that beyond all doubt what was called for in this case in the first instance was the appointment of a proper judicial commission or a judicial inquiry by a judicial officer or a senior member of the Bar or whomever the hon. the Minister thought fit to appoint. The whole world is watching this case and the damage which is being done to our reputation is very serious indeed.

Another very ugly aspect of this whole matter is that when Haron disappeared from the Maitland Police cells between the 17th and the 19th September, the Security officers who collected the Imam on the 17th, and he did not reappear until the 19th, took refuge in privilege at the inquest, saying that for security reasons they could not say where they had taken him. In fact it was suggested that they took him to Botswana and to Maseru. Yet it was during these three days that he was assaulted. At any rate he came to some damage and the final assault, I suggest, was made at that time. On the plea of security, questions about his whereabouts were disallowed by the court at the time of the inquest. It seems to me that the general picture in this case is quite horrifying. This healthy man, who was given a life insurance policy a year before he was arrested, a man of 45, was interrogated incommunicado mercilessly for days on end for nearly four months for 7½ hours at a time, until he was reduced to a state of nervous collapse. No charge was brought against anyone after ten months of investigation. One policeman after another tried to force him to make a statement containing what they wanted him to say. Finally he collapsed and died. No apparent anxiety attaches in official quarters to the manner of his death. No disciplinary action appears to have been taken against anyone. All we have had so far is just a cold, hard official rejection of public anxiety and more or less a rejection of the questions we have put in this House, which were dealt with in a very summary fashion. No attention, as far as we can see, appears to have been given to the magistrate’s findings. The authorities have been dragging their heels over referring this matter to the Attorney-General. All of this has been deferred for a year. This Session will end in a fortnight …

You talk such a lot of nonsense it is not worth listening to you.

I suggest that this delay needs some explanation by the hon. the Minister. It is a most extraordinary case and if the hon. the Minister thinks I am exaggerating, let me tell him that I have read every single document in connection with this case, every word of the inquest and every word of counsel’s submissions. If what the Police have to say remains absolutely confidential, I agree with the hon. member for Durban (North) that the Security Police must be a law unto themselves and that that is not a good or a sound principle in any democratic country.

Mr. Chairman, there is an old saying that a bee sucks its honey from the same flower as a spider its poison. When listening to the hon. member for Wynberg, it is clear to me that she derives pleasure out of placing the procedure followed and the mode of conduct of the Police in the execution of their sometimes very difficult duties under a magnifying glass and to blazon their actions abroad. In this way she does a great deal of damage to the image of the Police. It is a great pity that this should continually be repeated and done here. There are certain other channels through which this could be done in a more confidential and effective way, and a way not prejudicial to our Police Force. It would perhaps produce better results if it were submitted directly to the right persons. However, I do not have the particulars in regard to that matter at my disposal, and I think the hon. the Minister will deal with this.

Before I make a few general remarks on the South African Police, I should like to thank the authorities concerned who approved a few very necessary services within my constituency in regard to police housing. I want to express my sincere gratitude for a police station, four residences and single quarters for two white policemen at Groot Marico, as well as for a police station, single quarters for three white policemen and four residences at Swartruggens. I also want to express my gratitude for a police station, single quarters for four white policemen, and four non-Whites and three residences at Koster. I associate myself wholeheartedly with the plea made by the hon. member for Aliwal in regard to the housing problem which our police are experiencing particularly in our rural towns and at other smaller police stations. At many of these places, of which Groot Marico is an example, and I believe at quite a number of other places in the country, there is no municipality with housing schemes. There are no companies which invest capital for the construction of houses or flats for renting. The result is that when a police officer is transferred to such a police station he is unable to acquire accommodation. At Groot Marico the position is so acute that the station commander virtually has to live in the backyard of a business undertaking in a small three-roomed building. His other men have to live up to 20 miles away in farm houses without any telephone facilities. That is why I can emphasize from experience that housing is one of the matters to which immediate attention should be given. This applies to the South African Police throughout the country. I think they deserve it.

Then I want to state a few facts on the basis of this informative annual report in regard to the scope of the work of the Police, During 1968-69 where were 16,376 Whites and 15,537 non-Whites, a total of 31,913 men, who had to fulfil the tasks of the South African Police. For a population of 20 million there should in fact have been 33,942 men, that is 1.67 per thousand of the population. There were in actual fact .835 per thousand of the population associated with this service. It is clear that this relatively meagre force has to perform a maximum of work to maintain the safety of the country and law and order in South Africa. This meagre number of men have through devotion to duty and through being in a continual state of readiness established a brilliant record According to the report they dealt with 2,822,717 contraventions and alleged contraventions of the South African penal code, statutes, provincial ordinances and municipal regulations. This is 1,024,000 offences and 1,798,000 law infringements. The number of prosecutions instituted total 626,950, of which 462,351 led to convictions. 35,983 cases of stock theft were disposed of, of which only 17.77 per cent of the cases were found to be false. There is no time to discuss in greater detail other categories of this type of work which is being done by the Police. But one can also refer to the report of the Department of Prisons which mentions that on 30th June, 1968, 80,902 prisoners were in custody, of which probably 99 per cent had been brought to prison by the Police. It is a tremendous sphere of labour which is covered by these people. We read that in the execution of their duties they covered 114,537,727 miles with police vehicles across the vast expanses of South Africa and South-West Africa. Cessna communication aircraft completed a total of 786.55 flying hours. This does not include the helicopter services. The amounts spent on vehicles and fuel are also fantastic figures, but we do not have the time to mention them. This is proof of the enormous amount of work which is being done by these people. The present number of policemen has increased to 20,012 Whites and 15,876 non-Whites, a total of 35,888. This is therefore a slight improvement. Last year there were 1,751 applications from persons wanting to join the Police Force, of which only 1,499 were accepted. In order to attract men of good calibre the screening must inevitably be strict. It is essential that there should be a regular addition of physically, mentally and also educationally sound and competent young men to the Police Force. There are very attractive posts for these boys who have obtained Std. 10 and even only Std. 8 certificates in the private sector, as well as in the Public Service. I want to emphasize that the starting salary of a police constable is R1,32.0 per year, which in my opinion compares poorly with the R1,900 of the railway officials after the latest increases. Sir, attention must definitely be given to this matter. Not only does the work of the policeman make high physical demands. It also makes high mental and intellectual demands on him. In his work he comes into contact with the most highly developed and also with the most primitive people. They come into contact with millionaires and with the poorest people. That is why they must also be trained to adapt themselves to the demands made on them. There are various demands made on them when it comes to the investigation of cases, arrests, etc., because they come into contact with all these layers of the population, [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself with the hon. members who have pleaded for higher salaries for members of the Police Force. I shall, from a different point of view perhaps, furnish reasons why I think that if we want a satisfied and a good Police Force in South Africa we will not be able to wait a long time before remedying this position. Before I come to that I just want to say that I am sorry that I have to raise this matter under the Vote of this Minister, but I am aware that only he can recommend higher salaries to the Public Service Commission. I now want to say to him across the floor of the House that he can rely on the full support of this side of the House. We will be right behind him when he makes representations to that Commission in order to remedy this matter of salaries.

Sir, I just want to tell you for a while what I think of the South African Police. Let it simply be admitted: If the South African Police do not do their work, and had not done their work, as they are doing it and as they did it, then it would have been an unhappy South Africa in which we are living to-day. It is attributable to the Police and to the Police alone that this country has not been taken over by malefactors and Communism. Sir, let me tell you at once of the difficulties facing a Commissioner of Police. This is not only the pattern in South Africa. This is the pattern throughout the world. In their infiltration communists make use, inter alia, of front organizations, which infiltrate protesters or objectors. These are the people who take an active part in processions. Should the Police wait too long before they act, those people take over But if the Police act too quickly, then they are condemned by the rest of the world, and particularly by our own people. This police officer must decide on the right moment to act, and subsequently there is a hairbreadth of difference between acting or not acting. These are people who bear tremendous responsibilities. One only has to attend a few court cases to see how ordinary police officers come up against the best brains in the world, and how those people try to make fools of them. There, too, they come up against the greatest and shrewdest of rogues. Then one must remember that many people in South Africa unfortunately speak of the Police Force in a derogatory manner and with derision. This is the Police Force to whom we owe our safety and that of children.

Let me say at once to the Minister that if he has discipline in his force and if he treats his police officers decently and pays them properly, his power to act will be stronger in the rare cases where police officers abuse their power and their position to contravene the law. Sir, I was quite sincere about our being right behind the Minister in giving the police even better treatment, but I also want to say that we will be the first to criticize, just as he will be the first to criticize, if police officers do not do their duty in the best interests of every sector of the population. Sir, what have our police accomplished during the past few years? In the first place I want to say that South Africa can be proud of its police record as far as unsolved crimes are concerned. The number of unsolved crimes in South Africa is only 8.31 per cent of the total number of crimes committed. Compare this for a moment with Western Australia where the percentage of unsolved crimes is 39 per cent. In Rhodesia it is 18 per cent, in New South Wales 29 per cent, in Swaziland 26.5 per cent, and in Zambia 29 per cent. So I can continue to draw comparisons. This is truly a record of which we can be proud. But let me add something else.

I hope members of the public realize that when a police officer appears before the court because he has taken advantage of his power and position it is usually one of his own colleagues who had the integrity and honesty to bring his colleague who committed the misdemeanour before the court. That is the way the Police treat us. But how are we treating the Police? I have with me here an advertisement which appeared in a newspaper in which the municipality of Stellenbosch asked for application for the post of traffic constable. But look at what they expect of the applicant. He must have a std. 8 certificate, and in addition he must have a driver’s licence, etc. They then offer him a starting salary of R1,900 per annum. What are we paying our policemen?

Order! Various members have already discussed an increase in the salaries of policemen, but that does not fall under this Vote. It falls under the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Chairman, I am simply making a recommendation to the hon. the Minister. If you rule me out of order, however, I shall resume my seat.

I think we can now drop the subject of the salaries of the Police. Hon. members must confine themselves to the Vote under discussion.

Mr. Chairman, may I not therefore indicate the reasons for there being a shortage in the Police Force?

The hon. member must not draw comparisons between the salaries of traffic constables, Railway Police and the South African Police.

Mr. Chairman may I just point out that I am trying to indicate that when a traffic constable with a std. 8 cerificate begins with this starting salary …

Order! That belongs under the “Public Service Commission” Vote of the Department of the Interior. I cannot allow it to be discussed under this Vote.

But Mr. Chairman, surely discipline falls under this Vote.

Discipline does fall under this Vote, and the hon. member may discuss it.

But discipline is affected by these matters I now want to raise. Mr. Chairman, I am most certainly entitled to point this out. If a constable with a std. 10 certificate is appointed at R110 per month and the Railways appoint a constable with a std. 8 certificate at R160 per month, then surely we cannot be surprised if the discipline of the Police Force suffers as a result. Then we need not be amazed if there is a shortage of policemen. This is detrimental to the morale of the Police Force.

Order! What that amounts to is that the hon. member is advocating an increase in salaries on this Vote. I cannot allow that.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. I presume we may discuss the annual report of the Department of Police. The hon. member for Sea Point is talking about the inordinate number of resignations that we find in the Police Service. The hon. member, with respect, is indicating a reason for those resignations, namely the unequal rate of pay.

Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, may I just point out to you that in the latest report of the Commissioner of Police it is indicated that there is a shortfall of 2046 on the police establishment. This amounts to 11 per cent. In addition I also want to point out that 1,488 policemen purchased their discharge. This is 240 more than in the previous year. The total wastage of policement is 1,928. As opposed to that, 1,499 policemen were recruited. If there is anything which is relevant here, it is this question of salaries. We cannot expect a matriculant in the Police Force to have to begin with a salary of R50 less than a policeman with a std. 8 certificate is receiving in the Railway Police Service. We cannot expect people to take an interest in the Police Service if the maximum salary of an officer in the Army is R80 more than the maximum salary of an officer in the Police Service. We cannot expect there to be an interest in the Police Service if a warrant officer in the Army receives a better salary than a captain in the South African Police Service.

And the Police is the only line of defence.

Yes. Now hon. members may say that in war time the soldiers must be in the front line. But so, too, will the policemen also be in the front line. The Police have to deal every day with communists and saboteurs. Just consider all the places where policemen have to do duty to-day. They even have to do duty beyond the borders of South Africa. This is work which would normally in wartime have been done by soldiers. [Interjections.]

I maintain that if we want to retain discipline in this Force, and if the Minister wants to act firmly, we will have to support him if he asks for better conditions of employment and salaries for the Police. I do not think we fully realize what a decent and faithful, disciplined Police Force is worth to this country. To conclude where I began I want to say that it will be a sad day for South Africa if we do not have disciplined and decent Police Force, and we are running the risk of losing it.

It was very interesting to have been able to listen to two hon. members of the Opposition, the one speaking from the left wing and the other speaking from the right wing. I would very much have liked to have gone into the interesting speech made by the hon. member for Sea Point, but I think the hon. member who should reply to the speech made by the hon. member for Sea Point is the hon. member for Wynberg. I should very much have liked to have heard what her comments are on the commendation of the Police by the member for Sea Point.

I have three matters which I want to touch upon in my brief ten minutes because they are important to me. The first is that during the past few months four concerts have been held by the Police, and at those concerts one of the most important persons who appeared there was the wife of our hon. the Minister of Police, and her son. I just want to say to the hon. the Minister that those of us who attended the concerts, and I think the general public as well, are grateful for the personal interest he has in his Force, but also for a deeper interest, i.e. that with his entire family he shares in the interests of and arouses enthusiasm among our Police. I want to say to him, if he will allow me to do so, that his charming wife’s appearance there was a most gracious and kind gesture.

There is a second matter I want to touch upon, which affects my own constituency of Rissik. There we have two police stations, one at Hillcrest, which is actually called the Brooklyn police station, and one in Arcadia. Those two police stations are accommodated in two fine, well-cared-for houses, particularly the one in Arcadia, which was moved from an older to a better equipped house, and we are grateful for the facilities, and for what they are doing for us. But the police station in any community is in fact the symbol of peace and quiet, and I think it may perhaps be necessary in future, and I also want to advocate this, that when new buildings are erected there in future, particularly in Arcadia and also in Hillcrest, the architecture of those buildings should fit in with the building complexes one finds in a modern flatland suburb. [Interjections.] I want to come to another important point, if the hon. member for Yeoville will give me a chance.

Will this one be in order?

That is for the Chairman to decide.

Order! The hon. member must proceed.

I want to return to a third point. I am grateful to see that on page four of the annual report of the Commissioner of Police mention is made, inter alia, of the academic training of the Police. I am very grateful to see what achievements have been attained by our Police officials in this respect. I am grateful to the Minister and his Commissioner and his Department for making provision for the academic training of our Police, but further to that one must also felicitate those policemen who have attained academic achievements on having been able to do so in the midst of very difficult circumstances.

This brings me to a point which is very dear to my heart. I think that in our society there is insufficient respect for our Police. At important rugby matches, or elsewhere, too, where the Police have to act, one often finds people who, out of lighthearted considerations, grab the cap from a policeman’s head or pelt him with orange peels when he wants to take away a rowdy spectator or an obstreperous person. One finds that the public do not always help those policemen in the execution of their duty. I have attended various “intervarsities”, for example, and one thing which often annoyed me there is that some of our young students, particularly on such an occasion when one does not want to begrudge a student any merriment or exuberance, act in such a way that one feels ashamed of them. Particularly at those university centres where Nusas is in control, I often find that the young student wants to demolish the authority structure in our society, and I think that if here is one person in society who acts as prompter for this type of student conduct, it is the hon. member for Houghton.

The day will still come, perhaps only when she has long since departed this life, when her remarks in this House and outside in respect of our Police, and the attitude she displays towards them, will be directly responsible for a certain sector of the students in our society contributing to the demolition of authority. I think she often takes advantage of here position, here in the House and outside, to make it possible, for the sake of her own personal frustrated and maladjusted political ideas in our South African society, for young student leaders to demolish the authority in our society. I think it is high time now that the hon. member for Houghton changed her attitude towards our Police Service on the one hand and her attitude towards those people, who under the most difficult circumstances are mainaining law and order in South Africa, and that she adopted a far more responsible attitude towards those people. If she does not do so, the time will come when her successors if she does in subsequent years have successors here, will contribute towards making it more and more difficult for communities in South Africa to maintain law and order in a permissive human world society. For that reason I want to advocate that students from my own university and other universities refrain from following the example and adopting the tone set by the hon. member for Houghton.

What about the H.N.P. meetings?

Sir, here I am admonishing the hon. member for Houghton, and along comes the hon. member for Simonstown with an interjection like that. If it had been the hon. member for Wynberg, I would have understood it, because she is in certain respects the political ally of the hon. member for Houghton. I was busy admonishing the Progressive Party here, and look what happened! Here the United Party comes along and helps the Progressive Party, but we have just this moment heard from the hon. member for Sea Point what wonderful work the Police are doing in South Africa. The hon. member for Simonstown has been a great disappointment to me now. I want to say to the hon. member that his reaction is. to my mind proof of the two streams or dissension in the United Party. If you belabour the Progressive Party, the left wing of. the United Party protests. I want to make an appeal to-day to the effect that our entire community and particularly the academic youth, should be grateful for the opportunity they have of receiving an education and undertaking research in peace, quiet and order. I trust that when the occasion presents itself, they will be outspoken and will help those young men in the Police Service in the performance of their duties.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister of Police must be a very happy man because he has received nothing else but praise from all over the House, and quite rightly so. There is one section of the Police Force which nobody has as yet touched upon, namely the temporary members. They are mainly made up of pensioners who have come back to help the Force. They serve the Force very well. They are in a position to bring back years of experience and authority. Their salaries have been pegged at the equivalent of the top notch of a constable. The pensioner who might have been a warrant officer in the Force when he retired, gets back his rank as a temporary warrant officer or sergeant. It is true that he is not supposed to take command of a section or a division. In actual practice, however, he does the work of the post, the work which he did formerly. I feel that this is where a little bit of compassionate treatment on the part of the Department could be meted out. These men who are doing specialized jobs, should be given advancement in pay in addition to their pension.

Do you want to rejoin the Force?

Yes. I am also concerned about the sick leave benefits of these temporary workers. Many of them have borne the heat and the burden of the day in the Force to make South Africa safe and what it is to-day. Yet they are hamstrung. Some of them are getting a little bit old in the tooth and the injuries of their younger days are beginning to catch up with them. Let us face it, their sick leave provisions are not even as generous as that of the Bantu police. A person with 10 years service will get up to 90 days sick leave plus 90 days on half pay in a cycle of three years. From five to 10 years it is 60 days and so forth. The moment the sick leave and leave on half pay are fully utilized a person is discharged and that is goodbye to him. That, I think is somewhat callous treatment of those men who have served the Force and came back to help us out. Make no mistake, the manpower shortage in the Police is chronic. It is going to remain chronic in view of the ever-increasing competition which the Police under present circumstances have to meet. I want to recommend most strongly that the day has come for us to employ women in the South African Police and to form a women’s police force in South Africa.

We have heard this old fashioned conservative story that women have to be protected and so on. I have seen women police not only in peacetime, but also in wartime, in Europe and elsewhere, and they were able to take care of themselves and a lot of drunks and so on. The time has come when we should make use of our womenfolk to be productive in Police-work and to help us in our investigations. They can be used as clerks, they can be used as investigators and they could very well specialize in the cases where women are involved. In this manner they can help us in many ways. They can become fingerprint experts and sorters at the South African Criminal Bureau where they can release men for duties outside. Precedents have already been created in many countries throughout the world, and I do rot see why South Africa should lag behind in this respect. Women are capable, willing and eager to serve their country. This is an opportunity for them to do so.

When we come to training, I wish to compliment the Force on the wide field of courses which are being offered. I also wish to thank them for the assistance which is being offered for those who are studying. When we come to the practical application of this training, members would be amazed by the quality of marksmanship of some of our revolver shotists. This is the result of a lack of training after they have left the College. When I was in the Force we used to have two courses a year where we fired off 36 rounds of ammunition. Instructions were that we had to fire off the old ammunition before we could get new ammunition. I think we have to be realistic. We have to give the men a chance to practice their marksmanship. Let us make no mistake, affluence has not washed away the seeds of crime. It is growing. It is not only wishy-washy crimes, but crimes of violence are increasing. It is only fair that our men should be protected. When I asked how many people had been shot, it was not to criticize the Police I just wanted to know how many people were shot. I know when I was a Divisional Commissioner how I used to get these reports every time a fire-arm had been used by a policeman; whether a man had been hit or not. There were numerous cases where no action was required, because the whole shooting was justified. In fatal cases inquests were held without delay and it was always found to be justifiable homicide.

The hon. member for Wynberg does not say so.

No, because we were honest and we got on with the job without delay.

I was dealing with a special case.

I want to suggest that we have to face up to the fact that this is the first line of defence; we have to put money into it so that it can be done. Why not build special ranges at Police stations? Before a man goes on duty, he can fire five or six shots just so that he can see I whether his eye is in or not. I know it will cost a lot of money, but if we want insurance, we have to pay for it. In regard to this matter of marksmanship, it has always been a joke amongst us members of the Force to say that our revolver ammunition is not what it should be. I wonder whether it will not be possible to increase the Vote for ammunition so that we can get a better type of revolver ammunition and not the present revolver ammunition which is unreliable and endangers the lives of the Policemen themselves. You never know when it is going to be effective, and when it will not be effective.

I want to make a final request and that is the question of the detention of mental patients in the Police cells. That is a distasteful job. Police are not trained to look after mental patients and a police cell is not meant for a mental patient. It is not equipped as a hospital ward and for the sake of South Africa, I implore the hon. the Minister to take away these mental patients from police cells and to send them to hospital instead. In hospitals there should be special wards for them. It is a distasteful job and a dirty work which everyone who deals with this knows. The hon. the Minister will do us the greatest favour if he took away from the Police Force the responsibility for mental patients who spend their days, for months on end, in cells which are not fit for a sick person.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umlazi should have consulted last year’s Hansard. He would then have seen that pleas were made last year already for the appointment of women police. It is conspicuous that this afternoon the United Party is trying to evade controversial matters which are mentioned so often in the newspapers and about which everybody is talking at present. So far this afternoon they have spoken only about administrative matters. The question of salaries has been raised here as many as three or four times and besides that it has been only administrative matters. One wonders why the members of the Opposition are afraid to raise these, according to them, controversial matters.

The only member who came anywhere near doing so was the hon. member for Wynberg. But she herself prosecuted here this afternoon; she herself pronounced a judgment and passed a sentence. I do not know whether the hon. member knows what the procedure is with post-mortems. After the post-mortem has been held, the findings are forwarded to the Attorney-General who decides wether to prosecute or not. In this case another special investigation was ordered, and at the moment this investigation is in progress. Consequently I do not want to discuss this matter any further. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will have something more to say about the matter.

I should like to come to a small matter about which a great deal was written and said at the beginning of the year, and that is the student protest marches which took place in Johannesburg during May. This is one case in which I think the action of the Police was praiseworthy and in which they once again showed that their duty is the maintenance of law and order in the country. The Police had to act to maintain law and order, as the students were acting unlawfully. The students were acting unlawfully because, in the first place, they were acting in violation of the Riotous Assemblies Act. In the second place, they were acting unlawfully because the Chief Magistrate of Johannesburg, on the instruction of the hon. the Minister, had issued an order which prohibited this march. In the third place, they were acting unlawfully because protest marches are prohibited in the vicinity of the Johannesburg town hall. In addition, they were acting unlawfully because it was against the interests of the Republic of South Africa for them to hold that protest march.

That is your opinion.

This is our opinion and also the opinion of the whole population of South Africa, except the hon. member for Houghton. Police action was necessary and we commend it. Certain English-language newspapers tried to defend the unlawfulness, and I have in mind in the first place, the Sunday Times in particular. In the Sunday Times of 24th May, inter alia, the following statement was made in the editorial:

I shall come back to this question of morality in a moment. I read further:

In a moment I shall also come back to this question of “the rule of law”. Even the Star of 27th May, wrote about this. They even called it a “lawful protest”; in the heading of a report “Council defends lawful protests”. Another group of people who tried to defend these protests, was the City Council of Johannesburg itself. The City Council allowed itself to be misled by the students, in spite of the warnings from the National members on that City Council. After the march had been prohibited, the students still went ahead and staged the march. But they did not comply with the rules which the City Council had laid down. They did not stage that march within the specified hours and along the specified route.

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, is this speech not anticipating legislation which is on the Order Paper?

The Committee is not subject to the rule of anticipation. The hon. member may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, of what relevancy is this speech to the Vote under discussion?

Mr. Chairman, I am discussing the Police action. The Police had to act in this case.

Is the hon. member not discussing the Johannesburg City Council?

Order! The hon. member may proceed.

The chairman of the students’ representative council at Wits University tried to justify this action of theirs. The way in which they acted cast a reflection on the action of the Police and besmirched it. I just want to prove by this that the Police action was completely justified. The chairman of the students’ representative council said there were no paid agitators among them. But surely one can appreciate that these agitators would not go to the chairman of that students’ representative council and inform him that they are paid agitators. But one still wonders why some of the students started singing that communistic song “We shall overcome”, in the streets during the procession. Surely this proves that we were dealing with leftist elements in this case, where the timely action of the Police was very necessary.

This action was initiated to a certain extent by persons such as the hon. member for Houghton herself. She is a person who made the following remarks about the matter according to a report in the Star of 26th May. I quote—

In other words, Sir, she is encouraging them to continue with these protest marches. In addition, there are people such as professors and lecturers at Wits University, for example, Prof. Dugard and Dr. Van Niekerk, who also encouraged the students really to scorn law and order. In regard to this matter too, I want to refer hon. members to an article in the Sunday Times on 5th July, 1970. They went so far as to defend these marches. They actually encouraged the individual, although they deny this, to leave it to his own conscience when to obey a law or not. Therefore it is the duty of the Police to act at all times in order to maintain law and order in our country.

Section 6 of the Terrorism Act, which is the point at issue, is especially designed for making it possible to take action against these terrorists in our country. One must realize that these people are entering the country in order to undermine us. They are not here in our country to ask for the franchise. They are not entering our country in order to agitate for, possibly, mixed sport. No, Sir, our country is what these people want. What our people must realize, is that we must support our Police to act forcefully against these people. They are entering this country of ours like soldiers in a Trojan horse. But at some time or other in the night they are going to climb from that horse and undermine the Republic of South Africa. Therefore it is necessary for us to encourage this action of the Police in good time. The Police can be assured that this side of the House and the vast majority of the voters of the Republic of South Africa, including United Party supporters, are 100 per cent behind them and support them in this work of combating terrorism, and of keeping the Republic of South Africa safe for its people. This, above all, is the principle of “the rule of law”. Now one asks oneself, where does “morality” enter into the picture? Is it not “morality” when one wants to protect one’s children, one’s wife, one’s possessions and one’s country? Is this not the basis of Police action in terms of this Act? ’[Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am not at all surprised that members like the hon. member for Potgietersrus and the hon. member for Rissik are outraged at the thought that people should protest against section 6 of the Terrorism Act and any other Act that allows detention without trial in South Africa. That is their way of thinking. That is their political philosophy. Let me inform them that there are thousands upon thousands of people in South Africa who take exactly the opposite view, who think that the rule of law should be maintained in South Africa and who are perfectly confident that our Army and our Police Force, on whom we are spending more than R257 million and more than R94 million respectively, are quite capable of dealing with any terrorists attacks that might emanate in this country. Indeed, Sir, very few have. There are thousands of people who take that point of view. I have more depressing news for the hon. member for Rissik. His own university, or certainly a society there, has invited me to come and speak to them. Do you know what, Sir? I am going. The hon. member for Rissik may find that there are more young people in South Africa who are prepared to listen to my type of philosophy than there are young people who, in fact, appreciate his type of philosophy. I shall, however, leave those two hon. members at this stage.

I want to say at once that I think there has been sufficient evidence over the years of what has happened to people who have been detained without trial for the hon. the Minister to start assessing whether or not he should in fact take steps to discover what sort of interrogation methods are used by the special branch when people are detained under the laws which allow the Police to keep people incommunicado. The hon. member for Wynberg has very competently described what has happened in one case. There are, however, other cases which could be mentioned in this House, where the inquest findings are, shall I say, rather uncertain. Certainly, there were seven cases of suicide which could be mentioned. There were four cases of death by natural causes, and then there is the case of the Imam. That represents a large number of people who have died in detention. It is interesting to read court records of cases that crop up where people are eventually accused under different laws after having been held in detention. Over and over again the evidence given in court tells of certain methods of interrogation. One reads of the long hours of interrogation while kept standing.

Most of those stories have been proved to be lies.

I do not know where the proof of lies is, because in some cases the allegations have been upheld. One reads of long standing interrogations, and the names of certain officers crop up over and over again. I think the time has come for the Minister to realize that it is not enough just to allow people to be arrested and to be held for many months incommunicado. Nobody seems to take notice of what happens to those people during those months. During the Vote of the hon. the Minister of Justice I mentioned the one outstanding case where the law has been clearly abused. There were two cases I mentioned, but I refer here particularly to the one of the tribesmen who were arrested. After being held for many months under the Terrorism Act, they were simply found to have been involved in a tribal faction fight, and all of them were discharged. I want to know why it took many months during which time these people were held in detention before it was discovered that they had nothing whatever to do with terrorism or the Terrorism Act.

I want to come now to the case of assaults by the Police. The hon. member for Durban (North) mentioned that the public was dissatisfied with the manner in which the hon. the Minister had answered questions about what had happened to Constable Marais, the policeman who had been found guilty of assault. Apparently his complaint is that it took two questions before the Minister gave the answer. Do I assume from that that the hon. member is now satisfied as far as this case is concerned? I am certainly not satisfied. I cannot see why after the man had been convicted, he was then retained in the Police Force. I know that the board said that he should be retained, because he had had four years of service and had been “over keen” in this case. Nothing is more calculated to undermine public confidence in the Police Force than that such people are retained in the Force after they have been found guilty in a court of law. I want to point out that over the last three years there have been exactly—and not approximately because I am now quoting official figures—578 cases where members of the South African Police of all race groups have been convicted of assault. That is over the two year period from the 1st July, 1968, to the 30th July, 1970. Of those cases, 51 were referred to boards of inquiry and therefore some 527 cases were never referred to boards. Of the cases referred to boards of inquiry, 27 were found unfit to be retained in the Force and 21 of those 27 cases were dismissed. Six were however retained in the Police Force. All in all I want to point out that there are too many cases overall and I cannot understand why, after conviction in cases of assault, some of which were very serious cases of assault, it should be considered necessary to retain these people in the Police Force.

I want to return for a moment to the case of the detainees. I forgot to mention, when I was discussing this, that there have been at least three cases where the Government has settled cases by awarding quite considerable amounts of damages, rather than have the case go forward. That, too, adds to my submission that quite enough has been presented, I think, for the hon. the Minister to inquire into the methods of interrogation under this form of detention.

I also want to know how it is that the hon. the Minister has come to an arrangement in the Engelbrecht case, where a considerable amount of money was apparently paid out in settling this case of unlawful arrest and assault by members of the Police Force. We do not know how much was paid out.

Which case is that?

The Engelbrecht case, the kidnapping case. Something like R17,000 was claimed, but the hon. the Minister has refused to disclose in this House how much was actually agreed to when the parties reached a settlement. The answer the Minister gave was that both parties agreed not to disclose the amount. This is taxpayers’ money that the State is paying out. I want to know by what right the hon. the Minister has decided not to divulge to the public the amount of damages that was finally decided on. The hon. the Minister is not dealing with his own money, but with taxpayers’ money. I do not think he has any right to come to an agreement With a person in this case not to divulge how much it has in fact cost the taxpayers.

In the short time at my disposal, I want to return to another matter which I think causes considerable concern, namely the number of arrests under the pass laws. I want to tell this House that there is no single law that is a greater cause of racial friction in South Africa than the pass laws. The arrested people under statutory provisions of the law find themselves in goal for the simple crime of seeking work.

What have the pass laws got to do with the Police?

The pass laws have got a lot to do with the Police because, unfortunately for the Police, they have to implement the pass laws. There are thousands upon thousands of arrests every single year under the pass laws. The total figure comes to over ½ million. What I want to point out to the hon. the Minister is that the instruction which was given to the Police a number of years ago, in 1954, is not being properly carried out. It is virtually impossible for senior officers to see that junior officers do adhere to the instructions that Africans, who are stopped and asked for their passes, are given a reasonable opportunity of producing these documents. It is true that the Police report reveals that there is a diminishing number of arrests for non-production of these documents. It is still, however, a very high figure and it does of course not include the number of cases that are not sent for prosecution. I am referring to those people who are taken to the police station and pay the spot fine which is levied there. Therefore, the case is of course dealt with. [Time expired.]

The attitude of the hon. member for Houghton reminds me of a recent occurrence in Britain. Photographs of this occurrence were published in our newspapers. A large number of inciters—I think they are called demos—were protesting in the streets of London against the brutality of the British police, whilst next to them walked members of the British Police Force to protect them. Sir, it certainly is a privilege to be able to live in a country in which one has so much freedom to criticize so freely. But that freedom can also be abused.

We on this side of the House do not deny that irregularities occur in the ranks of the Police Force. Indeed, if no irregularities ever were to occur and become known, I would have been concerned. Here we have an organization of 30,000 men. Just imagine, nothing wrong should ever happen in such a large organization! Only in Russia and similar states does one never hear of anything wrong being done by their police, but in a country such as South Africa, we are all human and subject to human weaknesses. As one hon. member of the Opposition rightly said to-day, black sheep are not to be found amongst the police only: they are to be found everywhere, and I would almost say one finds them in this House too. But what is important in this regard, is that the Police have such a strict code of conduct and that irregularities are not tolerated. I can read an example to you, Sir. Regulation 58. It is an extract from the S.A. Police Regulations. It provides that it is an offence for any member of our Police to treat a subordinate in a tyrannical or oppressive way, to employ unnecessary force against a prisoner or any other person who has been arrested, or to ill-treat him in any other way; or to conduct himself in a way or to perform any action or to omit to do anything, whether or not it is defined in this regulation, which action is or may be to the detriment of the good order and effective administration, control or discipline of the Force. A record is kept of each charge of assault laid against any policeman and an investigation is held. There are even cases where the Attorney-General has refused to prosecute and the police have nevertheless taken action against those concerned and have applid their own disciplinary measures. What more can one expect? In 1969 more than 2,000 charges were laid against the Police and a small percentage of those charges led to convictions. But let us consider the other side of the matter. In 1969 there were more than 5,500 cases of assault and cases of obstruction of the Police, attacks made on the Police by the public, and 95 per cent of these cases were referred to the courts. Why is that side of the matter not stated positively either? We all know how infinitely difficult the task of the Police has become. A great deal has been said here about the threat of terrorism. It is serious, of course, but in addition to that, just consider how our social pattern has changed in the interior since 1910. The old rural pattern of the constable on a horse went out of existence a long time ago. To-day a policeman has to be an expert on all the complicated domains of life, in the field of agriculture, in the field of economics, in the field of the export and import trade, and many others. He has to qualify himself in those fields. I think we should sit back and meditate a little, and I think we should consider asking the Minister to erect a monument to the Police instead of offending them with exceptional cases. I am not at all in agreement with all the allegations mentioned in respect of the cases or the perspective in which they were stated.

Exceptional cases are emphasized in order to create an image of our Police of deliberate and organized tyranny. This is the implication of what certain hon. members said here. In that respect it is a continuation of the old story we have always heard here. There is no need for me to quote exceptional cases to state the other side of the matter. Let me mention to you the case of what happened on a boat on a river on our northern borders where a white constable was shot down by a machine gun and the non-white constable at his side was hit by a bullet which penetrated his head behind his eyes. That Bantu constable is blind to-day. He was suitably honoured by our Police. The Commissioner of Police awarded a medal and subsequently cattle was bought for him from the Amenities Fund of the Police: a farmer in the Eastern Province gave a cheque and more cattle was bought for him. These are the kind of things which should also be told. What happened in another part of the country? There a Bantu headman’s bodyguard, when he was lying wounded and moaning on the ground, was shot dead by a terrorist who stood over him with a grin on his face. These are the kind of occurrences which should also be told. Another example: A man’s dogs were barking outside and when he opened the front door to see what was going on, he was shot. Then there is Bashee River Bridge. What happened there? Innocent road maintenance staff returned to their camp in the evening; terrorists were lying in wait for them. When the evildoers saw that those people were not there, they deliberately awaited their return for many hours in the dark thinking what they were going to do to those innocent people. The people returned; their caravans were set alight, and while they, including a woman and children, were running away, they were murdered. These are the kind of cases which should also be talked about. It is, inter alia, also within this framework that the S.A. Police have to act. Do they first have to take a man arrested in a terrorists’ camp before a judge and then make out a prima facie case to the judge why this man has to be detained while he has information at his disposal regarding hostile actions and conspiracies which may endanger the lives of thousands of people? Mr. Chairman, the slanted image of our Police must be eliminated. There are, however, a few good signs on Opposition side that they are beginning to realize their responsibility in this regard. We welcome this, as also the spirit in which the hon. member for Umlazi made certain constructive proposals here to-day.

I should like to point out something else in brief: I do not think our public realizes at all times what a difficult task our Police have. Greater understanding must come from the side of our public. I was a spectator at a rugby match once—I am mentioning this to follow the hon. member for Rissik—and what happened there? After a few men had jumped the wire fence and had taken seats where they were not allowed to sit, a constable approached them and asked them politely to return. They refused to obey. The constable then took these fellows and assisted them back over the fence. What was the result? The people on the pavilion started bombarding the constable with oranges and tangerines and shouting at him. I looked behind me and there I saw a professor who was also throwing objects, a professor who, when he is addressing his students, tells them that they have to obey authority, but see how he was acting as a member of the masses; he was also taking a hand in the game of bombarding the constable. Another phenomenon is the one one finds at accidents. The people who can give evidence about the accident, drive away at great speed and other inquisitive people who ought not to congregate there and hamper the policy, stop to have a look at the gruesome scenes. Therefore I want to address an appeal to the public to try to gain a better understanding of the task of our Police and to cooperate.

In conclusion I should like to ask the hon. the Minister, especially in view of the fact that there still seems to be a great deal of ignorance as regards the functions and objectives of the Police, whether he will not consider extending, seeing that an officer has already been appointed as liaison officer, the public liaison work in our Police Force in order to combat ignorance as well as to serve as a useful link between the Press and the Police?

Sir, the hon. member for Wonderboom has disappointed me somewhat. I really had hoped that the hon. member, being the man he is, and in view of the various positions he has occupied, would have a more balanced outlook on matters than the one he exhibited here to-day. The hon. member quoted the remarks of the hon. member for Wynberg to show that we on this side really stand for a continued tyranny. Does the hon. member for Wonderboom want to tell me that he can justify, or wants to attempt to justify, the case of the Imam?

So it would seem.

I say that his speech was unbalanced in the sense …

She talked about “communist gaols”.

I say that the hon. member’s speech was unbalanced. He of all people should know that there are probably people, perhaps tens of thousands, who believe that the view of the hon. member for Wynberg is correct. Will the hon. member, with his great love of freedom, tell me that he takes it amiss of the hon. member for Wynberg for drawing attention to a matter such as this?

What do you understand by freedom?

The uneasiness of the Government when we perhaps say something which may be to the credit of the Police, is apparent to me. It is not only the Police, Sir. We must not say anything to the credit of the Public Service either. One would think that the Public Service and the Police belong to the Nationalist Party and not to South Africa. No, this sort of outlook does no credit to the Government or to the Police. The Police belong to South Africa. For the hon. member for Wonderboom to tell us that we are only now realizing the work carried out by the Police, is absolute nonsense. The Opposition has always realized what wonderful work the Police are doing. We have realized it for years. There is no doubt that there are many brave deeds done by the Police which never come to light, but, it so happens that if anything goes wrong, it easily becomes known. Goodness is so easily submerged, while evil comes to the fore. The hon. member at least admitted that there are always people in life who make mistakes. The Police would be the last people to tell us that they never make mistakes. I feel that it is the right of the Opposition, when they consider that mistakes have been made, to draw attention to such mistakes. Hon. members on the other side may differ. But, when we exercise that right, do not tell us that we are against the Police. The hon. member for Potgietersrus actually takes it amiss of us that we do not draw attention to the mistakes of the Police. He is annoyed with us about it. Have hon. members ever come across such an approach to any matter?

I see no politics in the Police. It is a fine instrument, an instrument which carries out its task most creditably and we appreciate it.

The matter I want to raise has nothing to do with the ordinary Police. I want to speak of the Police Reservists. I believe that at this stage there are 10,000 or perhaps many more men who, of their own free will and without any payment at all, are doing a great job. These are men who, by nature of their work, have to take risks in carrying out that work. It is my belief that where the State makes use of these people, it should see to it that they do not incur risks which are not connected with that work. I am informed that some of the reservists who join the Police, are perhaps not aware that such policies as they have, whether life policies, endowment policies or accident policies, may be affected owing to their having joined the Police Reserve. I believe this matter was raised in the House as far back as 1964. The then Minister of Police promised at the time to go into the matter. Recently, however, I was again asked to investigate very carefully what is happening. Apparently there are insurance companies which have some doubts in the matter. I would like to ask the hon. the Minnister this afternoon, on behalf of the reservists, amongst whom there is uncertainty, to ascertain precisely what the position is in regard to the policy of a man who renders this service to South Africa voluntarily and free of charge. Will the policy be jeopardized in any way? I am not so concerned about life policies. I feel that the normal policy would cover such a person if he should die while rendering this service. But what I do especially have my doubts about—and I say this with a measure of authority—is the so-called accident policies. If a person should perhaps be injured in the course of reservist duties, and in view of the fact that the carrying out of such reservist services is not mentioned in the policy it might well be that he would forfeit the benefits of such a policy. If a person does reservist work and there is this sort of risk in regard to his policy, he is taking unnecessary risks outside the course of his duties. I believe the State and the hon. the Minister of Police have a great obligation in this regard. These people should not be discouraged from performing this task. I believe the hon. the Minister will agree with me that unless he has the facts of the matter at his disposal already, he should try to ascertain them without delay and should try to see to it that the uncertainties of and risks for the reservists are removed. I ask him to investigate the position and to try to put it right as a matter of the greatest urgency.

The hon. member for Maitland has come strongly to the defence of the speech of the hon. member for Wynberg. I, too, want to congratulate the hon. member for Wynberg, and I want to give her the assurance that the speech she made in this House to-day will appear verbatim in the overseas Press. It will not be regarded as a speech of prima facie facts or charges; it will purely and simply be published as proof and facts. One would have expected an hon. member of the calibre and years of Parliamentary experience of the hon. member for Wynberg, to state her case objectively in this House. Consequently it amazes me that she made allegations such as the following. She said: “Security Police are a law unto themselves”.

That is correct.

Earlier this afternoon when a question was asked, she already made a cutting remark about the Security Police. This is not fair. If one wants to state a one-sided case, and if one wants to do so with a prejudiced mind, that is wrong. The same goes for the hon. member for Durban (North). The hon. member for Durban (North) paid glowing tributes here to the Police in general, but then he singled out the Security Police and of them he said, and I quote—

When I consult page 14 of the report of the Commissioner, I notice under “Safety of the State and good order” that more than 43,000 cases were reported. Moreover, there were more than 40,000 prosecutions. Is it fair to level a charge against the Security Police in general on the basis of three or more cases which are subject to inquiries by commissions? This to my mind is not only unfair, but also extremely ungrateful. In this connection I do not even want to refer to the hon. member for Houghton. Her speeches in this regard are so stereotyped that one does not even take any notice of them any longer. In respect of the hon. member for Houghton I just want to say that if she were to express a single word of gratitude under the Police Vote in this House only once, many of us would be in a dead faint.

Then I will say it right now.

You will say thanks to the terrorists.

Say that again?

In a time like this when the President of America has to use words such as “America is afflicted with a cancerous disease in which violence and terror are being employed as political implements”; if the President of the major Western power has to speak in this vein, we in South Africa can be nothing but grateful for the degree of law and order we have. We must most certainly thank the Police in the first instance, as well as the Security Police, for this situation. What is the position in respect of our Force’s strength? These conditions of law and order are being maintained with a very modest Force in this country. I have here in front of me certain statistics concerning the Forces of other countries, and the Police in South Africa are maintaining this admirable degree of law and order with a Force whose strength does not compare favourably with those of other countries. In South Africa the ratio is 1.67 policemen per 1,000 inhabitants. In order to prove my statement, I quote the figures of two heterogeneous countries. In 1968 the position in Israel was that there were 3.24 policemen per 1,000 inhabitants, and in the United States of America 2.00 per 1,000 inhabitants. These are as against the 1.67 policemen per 1,000 inhabitants in the Republic of South Africa. These are most certainly figures which go to prove how grateful we should be for so much that is being done by so few.

The Police also have other major tasks which they perform, and in which they excel in particularly difficult circumstances. Here I just want to quote a speech made by Gen. Gous at a medal parade in Johannesburg on 12th November last year. He mentioned, inter alia, the following figures in respect of Johannesburg, one of our focal points—

Gen. Gous was able to quote these figures and details in spite of the fact that our Police Force had to devote more or less 1 million man-hours to other departments, which, expressed in other terms, amounts to approximately 500 policemen of the Force being occupied on a full-time basis on work which is not police work.

In conclusion I also want to refer to a matter which was raised by the hon. member for Durban (North), and which causes me concern as I am also one of the people deeply interested in the rehabilitation endeavours of the Department of Prisons. On page 9 of the report of the Commissioner it is stated that the number of violent crimes increased throughout the country, and the reason advanced for this, is that many prisoners who were imprisoned for these reasons, have now been released. If this is a pattern which is going to increase, I want to plead for a very thorough and scientific investigation to be made once again into the policy of parole and of releasing prisoners serving long-term sentences and sentences for serious crimes. If this pattern, to which reference is made on page 9 of the report of the Commisioner, is going to continue, it must most definitely receive the serious attention of the two Ministries concerned.

Mr. Chairman, I want to speak of the ordinary mechanics of the Police Force. The hon. member who has just sat down, will therefore excuse me if I do not follow his argument.

I do want to say that I am very glad to learn this afternoon that even the hon. member for Houghton agrees that the South African Police are capable of looking after internal security in South Africa. I am quite happy that the hon. member for Wynberg brought to light that case this afternoon. I think it is only right that a case like that should be investigated and that the public knows what the true facts are about it. But at the same time these are isolated cases. I listened to one member this afternoon mentioning I do not know how many serious cases. There were only five. It must be remembered that with 30,000 men, there must surely be some of them that kick over the traces. There is no other department that applies discipline so strictly as the South African Police. When an offence is committed, I know that they are dealt with. The oases are investigated and dealt with properly. I am quite certain that the hon. the Minister will give the hon. member for Wynberg that satisfaction.

I have not heard anybody this afternoon compliment directly the Commissioner of Police, his officers, his N.C.O.s and his men, both European and non-European, for their service to the country during the past year. I want to thank and congratulate them for this wonderful service. But, Sir, we must pause, for a few moments, in any case, to sympathize with the dependants of the members of the Force who lost their lives on duty, especially th next of kin of Sgt. Bosch, who disappeared while swimming in the Zambezi River and was most likely taken by a crocodile. I think it is a most ghastly accident. We must also congratulate those members of the Force who were decorated during the year for meritorious service. Here I especially wish to mention those medals granted for bravery when attacked by terrorists while defending our borders. I sincerely hope that their comfort is always considered of paramount importance. May I ask whether permanent accommodation has been provided for these men? It is quite clear that fighting terrorists is going to be a long drawn out affair. I wish to congratulate the Minister, and the Commissioner for the step in the right direction in promoting non-Europeans to commissioned ranks. I agree it is a historic event and that they will serve their own people and South Africa. I feel certain that it has been brought home to them that it is a great responsibility to be a commissioned officer in the South African Police. It is also pleasing to note that there are no less than 43 police stations to-day manned only by non-Europeans.

Then we wish to express our regret at something that has happened in Natal recently, namely the poisoning while on duty of that wonderful dog Caro. He was one of the three police dogs decorated for service during the past year. Here I think I would like to make an appeal to the private sector that if they have young, suitable Alsatian dogs, to present them to the Police, because there is a scarcity of these animals.

In view of the considerable shortage of staff, I think the Police have done a wonderful job of work. But more than ever, it becomes abundantly clear that they should be relieved from the burden of extraneous duties as enumerated in the annual report.

There are, however, a few matters of service conditions that I wish to bring to the notice of the hon. the Minister, which I sincerely wish that he will not only investigate, but endeavour to rectify. There must be reasons for the very large staff wastage that continues to take place in this Department. Are we satisfied that the pay and allowances are sufficient remuneration for the long hours of duty they have to perform and the dangers attached to those duties? Housing is another point of grievance. The hon. the Minister promised to provide housing or flats to members of the Force. Can the hon. the Minister inform us what has been done in that direction? The way in which housing subsidies are paid would appear to be a general grievance. I believe that these subsidies range from R12.50 to over R30 per month, depending on the size of the loan. The young married man who cannot afford to apply for a loan and who lives in a flat receives no assistance. Should he not be helped to accumulate the necessary deposit? Then there is the case of the man who has bought a Community Development house, which is not registered in his name. He receives no subsidy. In order to qualify, he must first pay off 10 per cent of the value of the house. If he pays off his loan at a rate of R60 per month, it will take him five years. Can these members not be assisted to have their properties transferred to their names to enable them to receive these subsidies?

The third point I want to make affects the older members of this Force who have been thrifty during their period of service and have managed to pay off their homes. They also receive no subsidy although they are now liable for rates and taxes, to the extent of probably R200 per annum. May I ask why they cannot receive some benefit? The only men who will probably have no complaints are those living in Government quarters, for which they pay from R12 to R18 per month.

The service allowance is another cause for dissatisfaction. These allowances range, I believe, from R240 to R420 per annum. As salaries increase, these allowances decrease. Is this necessary? Out of these allowances the policemen have to pay for two sets of uniforms. These are expensive items to-day. The Railway Police receive free issues of uniform, and their pay appears to be slightly better than that of the South African Police. In addition they have a free rail pass as an annual perk. I therefore recommend that the South African Police be given free uniforms.

Another matter I wish to mention is the question of dental treatment. Why do we pay only 50 per cent of their dental accounts? Can this not be considered as ordinary medical treatment, where their accounts are paid for them in full?

The matters I have raised, if rectified, could go a long way towards making members of the Police Force more content. It could probably overcome some of the wastage which is most apparent in the annual report of the Commissioner. One thing of which I am certain is that the Commissioner himself will support any measures aimed at improving the lot of policemen. In conclusion, it is very pleasing to note that no member of the Euoprean staff of the Force was dismissed for drunkenness or as a result of a conviction by a court of law during the year under review. With that I again say a very big thank you to the Commissioner and the South African Police.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just sat down, will not hold it against me if I do not follow him, as he confined himself to administrative matters in particular, to which the hon. the Minister will reply. Since the South African Police occupy such an important place in our national life, there is a great deal to say in appreciation of the fine work they are doing as well as the mutual relations between the general public and our South African Police. This is important as they, from the nature of the case, have such close associations with each other.

To us as human beings few things are more precious than our lives and our personal possessions. We go a very long way to ensure these, but we do not always think of expressing our gratitude and appreciation to the South African Police who, after all, guard over these interests of ours and protect them not only for the present but also against eventual total destruction.

About one matter we may not have any illusions, and that is that we owe it to the National Government and the South African Police that it is possible for us to be sitting here to-day in peace and quiet and with a feeling of security. We are so inclined to accept this as a matter of course and we often omit to express our gratitude to those to whom gratitude is due in the first place. When we see what is happening in other countries of the world and the problems with which they have to contend, then we must be grateful because we have a Government in this country that has shown the foresight and has had the courage to take timely decisions of which we are already reaping the fruits to-day. We must be grateful for having built up and equipped a Police Force, but even more, for having men with courage and daring but also with the natural aptitude and gifts peculiar to the South African to maintain peace and order in a tactful way and to keep this country free of undermining elements. For that we have to take our hats off to the South African Police. In many countries of the world, countries who find themselves at the pinacle of economic prosperity to-day, unprecedented unrest is prevailing —strikes, disturbances and friction. These are circumstances which are anything but conductive to peace and growth, circumstances against which Governments are powerless. These are things which carry in them the germs of disintegration and complete destruction. In South Africa we, on the other hand, are enjoying peace and quiet. We are enjoying peace and quiet in spite of the fact that we, too, are being confronted by powers that are undermining law and order. We are enjoying that peace and quiet in spite of the large variety of races and peoples within the same national borders, something which to-day is the very source of so much unrest in various countries of the world. We are enjoying that peace and quiet in spite of the large gap in the levels of development of the various peoples of this country and in spite of differences in their religion, habits and customs, delicate matters to any people in the world, civilized or less civilized, and pre-emimently things about which people may become emotional. In spite of all these things we are enjoying peace and quiet in this country. This success may be attributed to many factors, but one of the most important is undoubtedly that inborn gift so peculiar to the people of this country, i.e. to maintain good human relations. Indeed, it is this very same factor which underlies our entire philosophy of life, i.e. to live as Christians and not to begrudge others to live as Christians too. There is no doubt in my mind that it is this very approach and attitude which also underlie the phenomenon, for example, of the decrease in stock thefts on the borders of our neighbouring state, Lesotho. It is this action that is responsible for the fact that to-day the situation there has been brought not only under control, but also back to perfectly normal.

We should keep the fact in mind, however, that to-day we are dealing not only with ordinary crime but also with an enemy engaged in a total onslaught against us on every front and field. This renders the task of the Police infinitely more difficult. This is a task which they, from the nature of the case, cannot always perform on their own. For that reason the Police can never divorce themselves from our national life from which they have to derive moral support and courage. Likewise, the general public cannot stand aloof towards the South African Police and regard their work as a task confined to the Police or as something which is the duty of the Police only. Indeed, successful Police action largely depends on appropriate supporting and appreciative contributions by the general public. In other words, success depends on mutual recognition and confidence. Therefore we are committed to ensuring that our Police Force will remain linked to our national life in such a way that it will continue to be a natural part thereof and will continue to remain the national pride of the people as a whole. We owe this to them. These are men who are called upon not only to take a stand between the world of crime and the community but also to guard over those things dear to us as a people, i.e. our Christian principles, our legal principles and our ethic principles, and this world with all its revolutions does not facilitate the task of the Police. On the contrary, it demands from them exceptional insight and cautious and diplomatic action. For that reason we may never stand aloof of this great task of the Police in this country.

I should therefore like to express my appreciation and gratitude to the Commissioner of Police and every policeman for the way in which they have acquitted themselves of their task. A great deal has been recorded in the annals of our short history which redounds to the honour of the South African Police, and if I read the signs of the times correctly, there will in future be many occasions to record in those annals. I have here in front of me the report of the Commissioner of Police, a very significant report which inspires confidence. If I had to summarize the message which emanates from this report, I would say it is as follows, “We are standing firm; give us your support”. In reply to that I cannot summarize the message which is emanating from this debate more aptly than by saying that message is, “Proceed; we trust you with the planning of the necessary strategy”. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Winburg used the greater part of his speech to compliment the South African Police and to impress upon this Committee the very important job of work that they are doing for South Africa. Quite obviously, Sir, I fully agree with him on both these points. Sir, I want to compliment the hon. member for not following the trend of some other hon. members on that side of the House in their unfair attacks on the hon. member for Wynberg. I want to say that the hon. member for Wynberg made a detailed study of a certain case, a case that has received a great deal of publicity in South Africa, and she quite rightly decided, according to her conscience, to raise the matter here. Sir, it is going to be a very sad day indeed for South Africa and for the parliamentary institution if hon. members should ever feel that they must not raise matters here because of criticism from that side of the House.

I want to raise a matter here which was touched on very briefly by the hon. member for Maitland, and that is the question of police reservists. Since the inception of the Police Reserve in 1960 this Force has grown from almost nothing to the stage where to-day it has a membership, I believe, of 17,350. We know too that during the course of these ten years many of these reservists have been injured, some very seriously, and in fact four of these reservists have been killed while on duty. There is no doubt in my mind that any man who is prepared to volunteer for police reserve work, after doing his normal day’s work for a period of eight hours usually, is obviously dedicated and must be motivated by a sense of civic responsibility and a genuine desire to assist the Police in the very difficult task they have in South Africa. We know that the strength of the Police to-day is about 36,000, and we have heard to-day that there is a shortage of more than 2,500. One appreciates that the Police Reserve must be doing a wonderful job to assist the South African Police in policing South Africa.

I think the hon. the Minister appreciates the work of the reservists because this is what he said in this House in speaking about the reservists. (Hansard, vol. 27, col. 7144): He said this—

This shows that the Minister himself obviously appreciates the work that the reservists are doing. Having said that, I want to say that one feels that once the Minister recognized the worth of the Police Reserve he should have gone very fully into the question of what compensation a reservist would receive if he were very seriously injured or what compensation would be paid to his dependants if he were killed. Sir, the position here is very disturbing. I find that no specific provision has been made to compensate the dependants of reservists who are killed or permanently disabled in South Africa. I feel too that in fairness to those reservists who are there now and those who intend to become reservists, they should know what in fact would happen if they should be unfortunate enough to get killed or very severely injured. I find too that the hon. the Minister does not accept direct responsibility in those cases where a man is killed or seriously injured. He as Minister refers the matter to the Workmens’ Compensation Commissioner who then makes a recommendation. It depends on this recommendation as to what compensation the dependants of such a man will receive. I am sure that everybody will agree with me that the position as it exists to-day, is quite unsatisfactory and must by its very nature create certain anomalies.

I want to raise a case; one does not like to do this normally, but I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that this particular case is one which went through all the proper channels first. It is a very sad case of a reservist who was killed in Rosebank a few years ago, leaving a wife and two very young children. This man was on duty and saw some suspicious-looking Natives near the cinema. He went to investigate and was in fact shot and killed by one of the intruders. The widow, after the initial shock, wrote to the Commissioner of Police and asked what could be done for her and her children. She then wrote to the hon. the Minister himself and when she was still not satisfied I was asked, on her behalf, to present a petition to this House, which I did. It is therefore obvious that everything that could be done was in fact done. I raise this matter again because I feel that this is truly a case which the hon. the Minister should review. These were the circumstances. This widow was left with two children aged eleven and three months respectively. She was granted a pension for herself of R36 per month and R18 for each child. In addition she was paid an ex gratia amount of R200. Quite obviously this widow is going to have a very difficult time. She can only work part-time. She will have to use this money plus the pension to bring up her family properly. This widow is from a very fine middle-class family. They were used to enjoying the better things of life. I mention this because it seems to me that there is no norm or basis in regard to the granting of ex gratia payments.

I was very surprised to learn that a Mrs. Radebi, the wife of a non-white police reservist who was stabbed to death while on duty, virtually under similar circumstances, received an ex gratia payment of R2,150 plus a pension. There is also another case of a hit-andrun motorist who was chased by the police. The police quite correctly fired on him. The policeman was charged and found not guilty and yet the Police Department decided to give to the widow of this man, who was virtually a criminal, an ex gratia payment of R10,000. Here we have a case of a dedicated man who gave his life for South Africa by serving in the Reserve. His wife gets a pension of R36 plus R18 for each child and an ex gratia payment of R200. I am quite sure that everyone here will agree that the basis of granting ex gratia payments is entirely wrong. This happened some time ago. Possibly amendments have since been made and a new system may be in operation. I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister whether anything has been done in this regard. If nothing has been done I should like to appeal to him to review this case and give it his very sympathetic consideration.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) will surely not hold it against me if I do not deal with the matters he has just brought to the attention of the hon. he Miniser. Although we are conducting a peaceful debate on this Vote from both sides of this House to-day and although I want to agree wholeheartedly with the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) that the hon. member for Wynberg probably did not intend to raise the matter in question which is, in fact, an isolated case, in this House merely to blaze it abroad for the sake of publicity, I nevertheless want to tell the hon. member for Wynberg that the particulars she furnished to us here to-day, and she furnished them factually correct, are ones which have long been known. They are not particulars which are being published or made known for the first time to-day. Already in the course of this Session of Parliament the hon. the Minister replied to questions in this regard. Now I should like to tell the hon. member for Wynberg that she, too, should not become too excited if one were to ask, with the same bona fides which I ascribe to her this afternoon, that things which are know should not be repeated in this House. It may to some extent rouse the suspicions of members on the opposite side.

I want to dwell on two matters, but in passing I want to associate myself with those who have congratulated the Police on their work. I in particular have knowledge of the way in which the Police are doing their work in the rural areas. Since I am mentioning this I should like to request the attention of the hon. the Minister in connection with one matter, and that is whether it is not perhaps possible to ascertain whether the type of police vehicle used is really serviceable. To-day we have a very large variety to choose from, and it may be desirable to give attention to this particular matter as well. We know that the task of the Police is not confined to the combatting of crime only, but is partly concerned with the prevention of crime too. There is one aspect of our crime record in South Africa which, in my opinion, ought to enjoy really urgent attention. I want to refer to the influence of drugs in crime. I am aware of the fact that there is a commission of inquiry that is investigating the question of narcotics or drugs, whatever we want to call them. I want to say here that it is generally accepted, indeed, in the United States of America it is accepted as a fact, that 33 per cent of all crimes result from offences in contravention of the law relating to the use of narcotics and drugs. When we consult our own statistics, We see in the report of the Commissioner that there were 27,000 cases of investigations regarding people who possessed home-made dagga cigarettes, which led to 25,000 convictions. In the past five years there were approximately 140,000 convictions with regard to dagga. The value of that dagga was approximately R125 million. We also notice from this report that the ordinary offences relating to the Liquor Act here were more than 187,000 cases.

In view of this it is clear to us that what we are concerned with here is the question of factors, such as the excessive use of liquor or drugs, which promote crime. This involves the Police in the prevention of those crimes. We in South Africa will not escape from the influence which drugs have on our youth, and not only on our youth but also on our adults. Now I feel, and this is the idea I should like to express, that since we are moving in the field of the prevention of crime, a very strong, co-ordinated endeavour must be made which probably will have to take place at the initiative of the Police. At this stage the Police really are the only people who are acquainted with the types of drugs normally in circulation and the methods of circulation. A coordinated attempt will have to be made in cooperation with the medical profession, our churches, etc., to bring the great danger of drugs to the attention of not only the youth of South Africa, but also the parents. It is necessary for the evil of the use of drugs and narcotics to come to the specific attention of the parents, so that the parents may observe possible misdemeanours on the part of the youth with regard to drugs. To-day our Police are faced with the situation that they have to deal with people who are addicted to drugs, or smuggle drugs, and whose addiction has reached an advanced stage. The parents of most of those young people or teenagers are not even aware of those children being involved in anything of this kind. For that reason I feel that it will only serve a good purpose if the initiative in this matter can come from the Police because if we can combat this, we shall be dealing with the prevention of crime which will in turn benefit the work of the Police in the opposite direction.

There is probably no need for me to stipulate in this House precisely what drugs are. I believe this is generally known. When we in South Africa speak of drugs we are inclined to speak of dagga only, but there are many other types. The danger is that according to estimates as many as 21 per cent of the people between the ages of 18 and 21 years in a certain area on the Witwatersrand use drugs to such an extent that they actually can no longer do without drugs. If we consider the question of age and the commission of certain types of crimes, we see that that particular age group is much more susceptible than other age group to certain types of crime. I want to conclude by saying that I am aware of the fact that there is a commission of inquiry into the use of drugs, but my plea is that the campaign should be launched at the initiative of the Police, so as to inform parents and children as well as the public as a whole of the effect of drugs on crime and how to prevent it.

Mr. Chairman, I am glad to have this opportunity of saying a few words about our Police Force. In the first place I want to congratulate them on the good and difficult work which they perform from 1st January to 31st December. There is not even a Sunday or a public holiday for them when they can say that they are off duty. Their telephone can ring at any time and then they simply have to go on duty. Sometimes they may not feel so happy about that, or may perhaps be ill, but their work demands it. I therefore want to congratulate them on the great service which they perform. It is dangerous work and we know this. We can see from the figures, of which I may perhaps mention a few later, that many of them are mudered and Stabbed. Then there are still certain people, probably very few, who blame our policemen and say that they act too harshly against persons whom they arrest. I do not think the Police are unreasonably. If I imagine myself to be in the place of a policeman and I see the man I want to catch, rushing at me With a knife or a dagger, I shall of course pull out my baton and give him a sound blow to render him temporarily harmless, so that I can handcuff him. That is not being harsh. One does this merely in order to save one’s own life. We see that in the past year 13 white and 18 non-white policemen died in the execution of their duties. It is for this reason that I am saying that one can never praise the Police enough for the dangerous work which they do.

But, Sir, there is something which rather upsets me, and there must be a reason for this. We are trying to strengthen our Force more and more. We do not have enough policemen in the country, and we all know it. Besides, a large number of our people are on the northern borders. I know this. But during 1968 and 1969, robberies increased by more than 100, murder cases by 229 and common assaults by more than 4,500. The figure for serious assaults is almost 13,000. This is in spite of all the precautionary measures which are taken. The Police see to it that they always keep their eyes on the strategic points where something like this can happen. But nevertheless it happens, and it is increasing. The question that occurs to me is, why is it increasing? Is there a reason for it? I considered whether it could not perhaps be ascribed to the ready availability of liquor to the non-Whites. They are more easily affected by liquor and then they become unafraid, to express it like this.

I, of course, have to deal with non-Whites to a large extent on the farms where I farm. When it is beer-drinking day, there is usually trouble among them. It happens so often. If I myself cannot succeed in making peace by means of placatory talk, I must telephone the Police to come and separate them and sometimes arrest some of them and take them to the gaol. They then appear in court and are perhaps fined or sent to gaol. Therefore I say that liquor plays a large role as far as this is concerned. This is the first matter that occurred to me.

A second matter is that to-day the non-Whites no longer work for a very small wage, as they did in earlier years. Money is reasonably plentiful among them to-day, and therefore they spend it in ways which are perhaps not very good for them, for example by buying liquor. As I have said, once they come under the influence of liquor, they become irresponsible.

There may be another reason. I would be glad if the hon. the Minister would give me some advice about this. In recent years it has been the policy of the Department to close down smaller police stations where there are perhaps only one white person and one non-white person. The policemen are then sent to the towns, so that they can strengthen the Force there. I know the reason is given that they are more easily accessible by telephone and that they have fast vehicles when they have to hurry to some place. But there in the vast Karoo, however, one finds that it is up to 50 or 60 miles. I am again talking about non-Whites. When trouble breaks out among them and one has to telephone, say, Burgersdorp or Queenstown, which are situated 50 or 60 miles away, a great deal of damage may have been done by the time the Police arrive there. I just do not know Whether it is the right policy to close down the smaller stations. I know of various cases which have come to my attention. I do not really want to mention hem here. I think it is the general policy of the Department of Police to close down smaller stations.

Then there is something which upsets me a great deal, especially in the cities. It is no longer limited to the cities either; it has spread to the rural areas as well, especially to our beach resorts. It is these people who do not work. The only work they actually do is to see how long they can grow their hair. This very morning, on my way to Parliament, I saw two young men with hair at least a foot long. They were coming out of an old half-demolished building where they had slept the previous night. These people have no work or food and practically no clothes. It is a pity that the hon. the Minister of Defence has just gone out, because in co-operation with the Minister of Police we must catch these people. We may laugh about it, but they do not sleep there alone. They have their womenfolk who spend the night with them in those places. It is a scandal! There are certain bars in Cape Town where a decent White cannot enter after six or seven o’clock in the evening, because it is not safe. Those long-haired young men are the “back-stabber” type. That is the type they are. Once they have got rid of their hair and are in the Defence Force, I can assure this House that they will be completely different people.

The S.S.B.

Yes, that is quite correct. They must he given some discipline so that they can also work for once in their lives. If they do not want to work with their hands, they must march and be taught to shoot with a gun, so that they can become useful citizens of the country.

Surely some decent people also have long hair?

That may be so. But I am now talking about a special type of young man who walks around in the streets here. One sees many of them walking around here. I think something (should be done about this type of person. I happened to speak to the hon. the Minister of Defence only this afternoon, and he told me that he has already taken 20,000 of them into the Army.

The Army barbers must have been busy.

Yes, that is true. We must still get rid of this other large section, although I know that we will never get rid of them all.

Another important point is that they are polluting our beaches to-day. If one goes to our popular beaches between eight o’clock and half-past nine in the mornings, one sees three or four young men coming out of the bathing cubicles. They have spent the night there, and they do not come out of there alone. The ordinary decent holiday-maker will see, for example, four young men with three young girls coming out of there, who have slept together there that night. These young men then go under the name of water-skiers or surfers. They are the ones who exert an influence on other young people and it is a very bad, harmful influence. [Time expired.]

I will come back to the remarks of the hon. member for Colesberg a little later on. Before doing that, I wish to react to the remarks made by the hon. member for Christiana. I notice that he is unfortunately not in the House at the moment. He has commented on the matter which the hon. member for Wynberg raised in the House this afternoon. I want to say to him that it would be a sorry state if there were any feeling amongst the general public that there is not liberty in this House to raise any matters which are of concern to the State or to individuals in the State. One Would expect that he, as a member of the legal profession, would apply to Parliament, as we apply to law, the principle that justice must be seen to be done as well as practised.

The hon. member for Colesberg has raised some interesting points. Although he has particularly in regard to the closing of the smaller police stations, I want to say that it is a matter which concerns me considerably and which concerns the urban areas as much as it does the rural areas. I make no apology whatsoever for raising again to-day under this hon. Minister’s Vote, the question of the absence of foot patrols in the urban areas of this country. The hon. the Minister’s reluctance to reintroduce these foot patrols is causing disappointment and concern in all walks of life in this country. It is no good, as the hon. member for Colesberg has pointed out, to have a patrol van which can be reached by telephone. What is needed is the policeman who can be walked into by a would-be criminal before he has committed a crime. If a criminal knows that around a corner he can walk into a policeman on patrol, he will be a little more reticent about committing crimes. One recalls the recent experience of the hon. member for South Coast. I want to mention that recently, during this Session, two elderly constituents of mine came here and sat in the gallery. They left the gallery at 7 o’clock in the evening as the House adjourned to go home. They walked down Parliament Street and then reached the Longmarket Street comer, which is a matter of 200 yards away from this House. Turning left into Longmarket Street to go to a bus stop, they were accosted by several young Coloured hooligans. This man was robbed of his wallet after leaving this House of Parliament, 200 yards away at seven o’clock in the evening. This is happening because these would-be pickpockets and this skolly type of person know full well that they can escape round the next street corner and be blocks away before any police van will arrive to take them into custody.

The hon. the Minister has been most uncooperative in this matter. He has offered to us the reason that there is a shortage of staff. Superficially I accepted that when he mentioned it earlier when I raised this matter. What is the position? I asked the hon. the Minister during this Session what the position with regard to the staff of his Police Force is. The figures which he has given me are that his establishment consists of 34,489 members and that there are 1,922 vacant posts. There is about a 5 per cent vacancy rate in the establishment of the Police Force. Let me go further. Even the hon. the Minister will be aware that as recently as 1953 we had foot patrols in the urban areas of South Africa. The Police Force in 1953 totalled 22,841 members and therefore represented 1.67 per thousand of the population of South Africa. The Police Force to-day represents 1.67 per thousand of the pupulation of South Africa. If one goes back to the time before 1953 one will find that with a lower Police Force proportionate to the population, foot patrols were carried out and there was no difficulty about providing foot patrols. It seems that the usage of the Police Force is a matter which can be queried.

I would like to draw attention in passing that it would be interesting if the Commissioner of Police in his report would again introduce what he bas had before in his report, namely the man hours taken up with extraneous work particularly in connection with motor accidents. I believe the time of the Police is being wasted preparing information which is for civil case purposes only and has nothing to do with the safety of the general public. I think that is a matter which the hon. the Minister can look into. I do want to appeal to him again to-day—and I appeal to him most earnestly—that the public must see the police on the streets in amongst them where they move every day. Nothing but greater public confidence in the Police and appreciation for the work of the Police can result and would be adequately demonstrated by the public if this request that I again make to the hon. the Minister is acceded to. We would remove what the hon. member tor Colesberg has referred to, this drinking to excess in public places and that type of crime which takes place daily because there are no patrols in the precincts of those city areas.

I should like to discuss another more interesting matter with the hon. the Minister. It I said to him I wanted to discuss Women in Love” I hope he will understand it is not the phenomena but the film that I want to discuss with him. According to Press reports, at appears that this film was approved by the Publications Control Board for showing to a restricted age group after censorship. The South African version of the film as approved by the Publications Control Board has reduced the run of it from 130 minutes to 120 minutes, which indicates quite a substantial cutting of that film. According to a Press report, the Police, acting on the complaint of some person whose identity has not been disclosed, demanded that certain cuts should be made in the film as it was then being screened in the Constantia Cinema in Johannesburg.

There is no clarity from this report as to what the cuts which were required by the Police were, and I want to know whether the hon. the Minister can give the House some information and deal with the question which arises in regard to this type of interference by the Police in these films. Is the Police action taken solely to ensure that the original cuts required by the Publications Control Board have been made, or in other words, to see that the directions of the board have been carried out? I believe that films are cut before they are returned to the exhibitors; so it would appear that it is unlikely for the Police to investigate it. Or did the Police in this instance demand cuts additional to those originally directed by the Control Board, and did they make that demand on a subsequent decision or instruction of the Publications Control Board or, thirdly, did the Police merely on their own volition decide that this film needed further censoring land then decide that a further cut should be made?

I think this is a principle which must be cleared up very quickly because it is quite unacceptable and, to say the least of it, irregular should the Police at any stage assume unto themselves the right of censorship. Censorship is vested in a statutory body, the Publications Control Board, and I trust that the Minister will make an unequivocal statement that the decisions of the Publications Control Board are not subject to review by the Police or subject to variation by the Police, and that censorship rests entirely and only in the hands of the Publications Control Board. I have made it dear to the hon. the Minister that what I have stated to him is what appeared in the Press. I believe it would set the public’s mind at rest if they knew that this is irregular and that steps will be taken to see that there is not a recurrence of it, so that the public has the assurance from the Minister, that there is no intention or claim by the Police to be able to superimpose their will on the will of the Publications Control Board.

If we continue in this fashion, I do not know what is to become of politics in South Africa. I find myself in the unenviable position this afternoon of having to support many of the representations made by the hon. member for Green Point, which I am in fact going to do. As regards the film, I cannot give him any reply at all. Moreover I have absolutely no desire to see that sort of film. It seems to me that United Party entered this session with the idea that they were coming to enjoy the luxuries of a boutique, but while they thought that the National Party would curl their hair and cut it according to the latest fashions and style, their teeth have been drawn instead, so much so that we could not even allow our main speaker, the hon. member for Prinshof, to take part in this debate. There was really nothing in it on which we could use his talent.

He is sitting back waiting for another commission.

Sir, I want to touch on one or two matters connected with the Reserve Force. This is definitely no longer an experiment; it is an accomplished fact; it is a successful part of the machinery which was established to organize the community properly and to protect it against undesirable elements. The first-class experience which members of the Reserve Force obtain in their work with the Police, helps them to develop personal relations outside as well. It is essential experience which they gain by coming into contact with other race groups as well, because in this way we shall eventually succeed—I maintain that we are already succeeding—in conducting our race relations in such a manner that it will contribute to the eventual complete and total success of our policy of separate development. Sir, it is among these people, who do their duty at unknown addresses in the country and who carry out the laws which we make here in the splendour and glory of this Chamber, that the will to survive and to protect our nearest and dearest, our wives and our children, is forged. It is they who have the opportunity to act as our public relations officers outside, and as such we want to tell them that we have full confidence in them, they who have to co-operate fully with the Police Force.

Sir, as we know, there are four groups of reservists. We know that they are prepared to be called up; we know that they can be used in rural areas; we know that they can be used to patrol their own areas, and so forth, but I want to argue that precisely because the Reserve Force is developing its own identity, which is evidenced by the appointment of officrs with their own insignia of rank, there is no longer any reason why we should not have a uniformed reserve force. We also see the co-operation of the Department and the hon. the Minister in the fact that he has had R100,000 voted to provide uniforms for these people. But I Want to go further and ask that, since these people are developing a pride in their appearance when they are on parade or on duty, the hon. the Minister should consider issuing second winter and summer uniforms. While one uniform is at the dry cleaner, the other uniform can be worn. This applies, of course, to those people on active duty.

Then I want to ask the hon. the Minister if he would consider arranging more shooting practices for these people, not because we want them to make more use of their firearms, but because a man who can use his firearm is in fact a guarantee against indiscriminate use of fire-arms. At present they have one or two free practices a year. I am informed that this is regarded as insufficient, and I want to propose that at least four free practices should be provided, particularly because so many of these people who participate do not fall in the highest income groups.

In support of the plea made by the hon. member for Green Point, and in view of the shortage in the Police Force, I should like to make this further proposal: Can we not consider extending patrol duties to the reservists in the sense that they can carry out patrol duties on foot or by means of slow forms of transport, which might still be invented, in the areas in which they live? This is not a very popular proposal and I therefore want to qualify it immediately by saying that I think these people should receive some acknowledgment by way of a monetary allowance when they have completed a certain number of hours on duty during a year. I think it is no more than right that we should grant such acknowledgement to these people. It is important, as the hon. member for Green Point said, that we should prevent crime. By virtue of the tremendous efficiency with which our flying squads operate, our present system is organized on the basis that the Police are immediately called in when a crime has been committed, and it is solved in a jiffy, but the “bobby on the beat” will be able to take preventive measures. He will even discourage the intent to commit a crime. Then there are also areas, for example white-by-night areas, where we can already use women police reservists. This is not far-fetched. It can be done to improve our manpower position, or shall I say our womanpower position.

Mr. Chairman, it is a beautiful day to-day. The House seems so beautiful to me, and the lights are shining so brightly. This is because of all tributes paid to the Department of Police here to-day. I appreciate this, because I believe that this is a department with people who, because of human failings, also make mistakes from time to time, but it is nevertheless a department which is well administered, and in the light of all the circumstances renders very good service to South Africa. Although it is not necessary for me to say a great deal, I do, for the purposes of the record, want to make a few remarks about the department and its activities. On the face of it, we have grown accustomed to a large measure of peace and quiet in South Africa in recent times, to such an extent, in fact, that our population has gained the impression that everything is in order and that there are no dangers threatening. This is, however, not the true state of affairs. Let us turn our thoughts back a little. Two years ago we had the Poqo incidents near here, i.e. at Victoria West, Graaff-Reinet and the vicinity of Burgersdorp. In 1966, when the terrorist activities began, the Government decided to send Police to Rhodesia and the borders to go and help against the terrorist infiltration which was taking place there. We are also aware of the fact that after the terrorists had largely met their match on the borders, they changed their tactics somewhat. We are aware that instructions were then given that, although the terrorist activities were to continue, they were to concentrate on employing a different method in South Africa. This method was to organize the non-white population in South Africa in order to bring about an uprising here. We know that part of the strategy of the communist is that he tries to create chaos and unrest in a country. Once that unrest and chaos have been created he follows up his dirty work from outside. Therefore we must not be too easy in our minds. Only a few weeks ago we again saw the sophisticated handiwork of subvertery here in South Africa when pamphlets were distributed in a sophisticated way, explosions occurred and tape recordings of speeches were played. That was done to influence the public here. I think we all agree—I hope the hon. member for Houghton as well—that these are dangers against which all of us must take a stand. We are up against people here who have no respect for either the Nationalists or the United Party or the Progressives. These are threats aimed at undermining South Africa, undermining the white man’s authority in Southern Africa, and driving us out of this country. Therefore it is essential for us to take note of the circumstances, and not to think that the dangers have disappeared completely. Last week I received an intelligence document, one of those which are furnished to me from time to time, in which I found the following information on events which had taken place near the borders of South Africa in July, 1970. These events had not taken place within the borders of South Africa. I quote from this document (translation)—

I should like hon. members to note that these civilian inhabitants are not necessarily white inhabitants. I shall read out a few incidents in order to give hon. members some indication of how threateningly the dangers are being built up against South Africa. I quote again:

I have quoted these few incidents to hon. members in order to impress on them the dangers which are threatening South Africa and what is happening near and around our borders. I do not intend giving an account today of the latest information on what is happening along our borders, but I want to give hon. members the assurance that the activities of the terrorists are continuing and that the need to have our men on the border and in Rhodesia is still as great as it was at any time in the past. I can only say that it is due to the timeous and effective action of our own Police and the people who assist them that people of the kind about which we have just been reading are not already operating in South African territory. I think it is a good thing for us to look at the service conditions under which the South African Police have to perform their duties. We have heard a good deal about this to-day, and I do not want to say very much about it. In the first instance, in thinking of the work of a policeman, one realizes that it is fraught with danger. The work of a policeman is undoubtedly fraught with danger, and I want us to bear in mind that the policeman has to deal with the basest elements in our country, and this is undoubtedly so. The people against whom he has to take action are in most cases the reckless ones, the dangerous ones, murderers and thieves. I want hon. members to picture to themselves for a moment that a few hundred of our men are serving on the border and are doing patrol work every hour of the day and week. Hon. members must picture to themselves the young policeman of between 19 and 22 years of age walking around in the busch in the Caprivi area or in Rhodesia. From time to time he comes into contact with terrorists or runs the risk of coming into contact with terrorists at any time. Nevertheless it is his duty to do his work. It is his duty to face the danger and in so doing to keep away the danger from all of us. I have had to listen to a great deal of criticism. People ask me why the Police do not shoot dead all terrorists. I want to say here to-day that it is not in the Afrikaner’s nature to shoot a person dead when he throws down his gun and his cartridges, puts his hands up and says: “Please!” Moreover, it would not be the right thing to do. When you are really in danger and a bullet of that person may cut you down, it is of course the person who shoots first who is successful. I am mentioning this example in order to give hon. members an indication of the circumstances in which the young policeman has to carry out his duties. He comes into contact with people against whom he has to use force and from time to time a fire-arm. He is entitled to use a fire-arm in particular circumstances. But now we are experiencing a very great measure of criticism. We say he may use force, but that he must use no more than enough. If it seems to us that he has used just a little too much force, we are ready to criticize him. That person, who endangers his life because of the work he is doing, is often accused by us of having committed an act of violence when he has perhaps used just a little too much force. Then we are always too ready to criticize him for it. The work of the policeman is most certainly not pleasant. Hon. members can picture to themselves the circumstances in which he has to work. Just think of the places he has to patrol and the holes he must literally crawl into in order to perform his duties. None of us would like to do these things.

Another aspect of police duty is that a policeman must always be available. That is one of the requirements we lay down for police duty. He must be available for police duty at any time of the day or night, irrespective of the shift he is working, if it should be required of him. A heavy responsibility rests on the shoulders of the policeman. His responsibility is different to that of a soldier, who acts under discipline and the orders of an officer. In most cases the policeman is alone. At the age of 19 years he qualifies as a constable and then he must do patrol work alone. He does not have somebody with him whom he can ask what to do. He cannot ask whether he should stop using force now, whether he should do something or should not do it. He alone, with the training he has received and the experience he has gained, must decide what to do in the particular circumstances. In the light of this, I think we must realize that even the responsibility of the most ordinary constable can, on occasion, be a very onerous one.

There is another aspect to the matter as well. In most cases the policeman is expected to make a split-second decision. He cannot say: “Put a question on the Question Paper; I shall reply to it to-morrow”. Things happen before his very eyes, and circumstances arise in which he must decide in a split second what to do. It is not only the implications of the decision, but also the fact that that decision must be taken at that very moment by that young man. This is why I am grateful to see that there is to-day such a great deal of sympathy for and appreciation of the work which is being done by these policemen. The Police are always in the public eye. There is practically no newspaper which does not contain some report in which the South African Police are mentioned. The thousands of cases in which they do their duty and in which they do the right thing under difficult circumstances mean no more to us than that they are doing their duty. Then we are satisfied, because they are doing their duty. If, however, it should happen that as a result of his split second decision a policeman should do the wrong thing in those same circumstances, it is as though the whole world descends on him, and not only on him, but also on the whole of the South African Police Force. This is a fact, but I have no objection to our criticizing cases where wrong action was taken. Mistakes must occur in the work of the Police, otherwise they would not be human. However, I can give hon. members the assurance that the Police Force, as I know it, acts in a firm fatherly way towards those who transgress. There is not the least doubt about that. The officers in charge of the Police have told me umpteen times that there is no room for a dishonest person in the Police. There is no room for such a person. The Police must be kept free of such persons. Only those who qualify can remain in the South African Police Force. I now want to say in general that in all cases where a policeman has committed an offence, has had a criminal charge brought against him and has been convicted, a board of inquiry is appointed by the Police. An inquiry is then instituted into whether he is still good enough to remain in the South African Police.

In every case?

In all cases where they are convicted.

That was not the answer you gave me in this House.

I understand there are certain minor convictions in the case of which a board does not sit, but convictions which are serious in any way are naturally investigated by a board. It stands to reason that it is not necessary in the case of a trifling matter.

Sir, there is another aspect of the Police which I should like to mention, i.e. the temptations to which policemen are exposed. Hon. members must bear in mind that in dealing with people the young policeman can be exposed to scores of temptations. One of these is the possibility of bribery. It can so easily happen that when he catches a person, that person says to him: “Please, I shall give you R10 or R20; just let me go, and leave the matter at that.” How many times do hon. members think this happens in life? Let me fell hon. members that it happens thousands of times that an attempt is made to bribe the policeman not to do his duty. I want to give hon. members the assurance to-day—I have said this repeatedly to the Commissioner of Police —that I may pardon a policeman if he has committed am offence involving the use of liquor, that I shall perhaps even pardon him if he has committed an offence involving women, but, Sir, if he is dishonest, if he is corrupt, there is no room for him in the South African Police Force. In fact, I think no branch of the Public Service can afford to have any official who is corrupt, but the South African Police can least of all afford to retain in its service anyone who is corrupt. We must maintain the Police Force according to these standards.

A second form of influencing is when a plaintiff, as in the case of Marais, who was a good deal older than the young constable, influences the young constable to do things which he would probably not have done in other circumstances. In the case of Marais the plaintiff was much older than he was. This is one of the matters which was taken into account and about which the hon. member for Houghton is dissatisfied now. The plaintiff was a good deal older than the constable, and influenced him. Indeed, the plaintiff did more of the assaulting than the constable, but now it is the young constable who has to pay the penalty; he who actually was the victim of the plaintiff, who influenced him in the circumstances.

It was the court that found him guilty.

Of course it was the court that found him guilty. But these were the circumstances of the case which made us decide to retain him in the force. This is as I have already explained it to the hon. member.

The incidence of crime has increased all over the world, as well as in South Africa, over the past years. But I think we can say with gratitude that it has not increased at the same rate in South Africa as in other countries of the world. I think for that we have to thank the action taken by our first line of defence, the South African Police.

Unfortunately we find at present a state of affairs, especially amongst the youth, where they revolt against authority, against the authorities. Perhaps the general world conditions are responsible for this, but I must say that, as far as this matter is concerned, we here in South Africa are at least better off than are most of the other countries in the world. It is the duty of the S.A. Police—in fact, we expect it of them—to enforce the laws of our country. Of course, the Police do not make these laws; that is done by this Parliament, and the only task of the Police is, apart from their other duties, to ensure that these laws are enforced. And yet one gains the impression from the reaction which follows whenever the Police have to take action in unpopular cases, such as under the Immorality Act, that the Police are actually being held responsible for the law, whereas what they are actually doing, is being done because the law requires them to do it. This is unfortunately the state of affairs at present. i.e. that because the S.A. Police see to the enforcement of the laws, they are being associated with those laws and being blamed for the existence of those laws.

In the course of this debate more than one hon. member discussed one aspect of another of the S.A. Police. If I deal with a particular aspect in reply to an argument advanced by one of those members, the other hon. members should accept that my reply holds good for them as well. For instance, a great deal was said here about extraneous duties which the Police had to perform, and in this regard hon. members quoted what was said in the annual report of the S.A. Police about the large number of man-hours which the Police had had to expend on this type of work. Unfortunately it has always been the attitude that, whenever we are not sure by whom certain work should actually be done, we fall back on the Police. At present we are even enlisting the services of the Police at elections, more specifically in cases where special votes are recorded. This has also begun to present us with problems. In this manner the services of the Police are enlisted by many Departments. I have here a list of those Departments in alphabetical order: Bantu Administration, Transport, Immigration—the lot! The list also furnishes an indication as to the number of hours which the Police had to expend on each Department.

Can we have a copy of that list?

I have no objection. The hon. member may have a copy. I must admit that this trend is beginning to present us with problems. Take the “pumpkin” list as an example. Farmers know what it is, i.e. the agricultural census. This is a complicated list. Since nobody else can complete it, the Police are expected to do so. The farmers usually bring this list, which was sent out by the Police in the first place, back to the Police and ask them to complete it as well. No, I am afraid that in this respect we shall have to apply the brake to a certain extent. In view of their establishment and in view of the manpower shortage, the police cannot go on performing all these extraneous duties. I think the time has arrived for me to negotiate with my colleagues in an attempt at making arrangements whereby Departments will perform this type of work themselves.

There are a few other matters which I want to raise in this regard. There is, for instance, the question of police-women. The hon. member for Umlazi—I do not know whether he was informed—raised the question of employing women in the Police Force. The same matter was discussed last year as well. For that reason I want to make the statement to-day that the Cabinet has decided in principle to introduce women into the Police Service. At the moment negotiations are being conducted with other Departments, especially with the Department of the Treasury and with the Public Service Commission, in order that administrative arrangements may be made for this purpose. A plea was also made here for the employment of female reservists. Perhaps the hon. member for Houghton will be one of the first applicants. It goes without saying that we shall not use women for ordinary police services. We shall use them for work which is suitable for them to do—such as in charge offices, in certain inquiry services, the investigation of certain crimes, the service of process, and so forth. In actual fact, there is a large variety of work that can be entrusted to women. It gives me pleasure to make this announcement in reply to representations which were made here for the employment of women in the Police Force.

Then I want to make an announcement in regard to uniform allowances for non-white members of the Police Force. These allowances in respect of non-white members of the Force have lagged behind. At present these allowances amount to R13 a year in respect of the foot patrol division, R14 a year in respect of the mounted division, and R20 a year in respect of the criminal investigation division. In order to bring this allowance into line again with the current costs of replacement and of articles of clothing, the Cabinet has agreed to its being increased to R66 a year, irrespective of the division in which service is rendered.

We heard a great deal to-day about the salaries of the Police. You, Mr. Chairman, ruled that this was not really a matter which should be discussed on this Vote. I agree with you, Sir. Nevertheless, I just want to record my appreciation to those hon. members who made pleas here for the salaries of the Police to be improved, in view of their particular duties and functions. Hon. members are, of course, aware of the increase in the salaries as from 1st January, 1971. As far as I am concerned, I regard the Police as forming part of the Public Service. But I also realize that a very strong case can be made out for the Police having to be administered separately, in view of their particular services and working conditions. This is a matter for consideration, but at the moment the Department of Police forms part of the Public Service and, unlike the Railways or the Post Office, it is not a separate Department. Those two Departments are business undertakings. They collect their own revenue. They have their own budgets. In that respect the Department of Police is different from those two departments. But at this stage I do not want to argue on whether the Police should in fact be quite separate as regards salaries, etc., but the fact remains that they form part of the Public Service at present, and the salary increases to an amount of R69 million a year which were approved and announced recently and which will come into force on 1st January, 1971, Will of course be applicable to the S.A. Police as well. In so far as improvements in salaries have been announced, they will also affect the Police, and the necessary adjustments will be effected. But I should like to add here that, in view of the important service being rendered by the S.A. Police at the present juncture and the increasing demands which will be made upon them in the future, it is essential that a sufficient number of persons be recruited and retained for the Force. Accordingly it has been decided to grant, as from 1st January. 1971, over and above the increased commencing salaries and salary improvements which will come into operation then, an additional salary benefit to recruits in the Police Service upon the completion of a period of service of 12 months. Further details of this concession are at present being worked out by the Public Service Commission in consultation with the Department, and will be transmitted to the Department in the near future. I am very thoroughly aware of the fact that once the policeman—the young man who has passed St. 10 or Std. 8 and who receives his training at the College —has completed his course of training at the College, he has, to a much greater extent, been polished and prepared for life and for the work he has to perform than is the case With other members of the Public Service or other young men and women who take up employment. It is for that reason that I think, to start with, that it is justified to grant recognition to members of the S.A. Police, because they have been prepared to render more useful service in the jobs they hold. This coincides with the basis of recognition for experience and training, and for that reason it has been accepted in principle that after a year’s service policemen will receive a salary adjustment over and above the normal adjustments. I hope and trust that this Will to a large extent remedy the position of the Police.

Now I should like to refer briefly to a few matters Which were raised here by a number of hon. members. The hon. member for Durban (North) said very fine things about the Police to-day, and there is actually nothing on which I need to comment at any length. The only thing is that the hon. member made an attack on me; he said that I was too secretive. Actually, I came here prepared to-day to quarrel a great deal with the hon. member, but the debate has been conducted in such a good spirit and atmosphere that I no longer feel inclined to quarrel with him. In a previous occasion he attacked my integrity, and to-day he once again said that I was secretive. I must tell him this to-day: During the first session of this year he attacked my credibility without any justification, and that I shall not forgive him easily. The only excuse I have for him, is that at the time there was an election in the offing and “credibility gap” had become a catchword of the Opposition. [Interjection.] I know what I am talking about, and the hon. member also knows what I am talking about. The “credibility gap” was the stamp which that side of the House wanted to place on this side with a view to the election which took place subsequently, and at the time he Was the chap who referred to me as being guilty of the “credibility gap” to which his Leader referred. That was unwarranted, and I want to tell him this to-day: He is a lawyer just as I am. I accept that the man on the opposite side of the table is an honourable man until the opposite has been proved, but that is not the attitude which he displayed towards me. But I think we may as well leave the matter at that to-day.

The hon. member for Aliwal spoke about housing facilities for policemen. I must tell you, Sir, that housing is a matter which was touched upon by several hon. members and about which we are, naturally, most concerned The Cabinet has decided that the S.A. Police are to be provided with 100 per cent housing. It goes without saying that it is impossible to do this overnight, but we shall do this as fast as we can. When I refer to 100 per cent housing, it goes without saying that this does not mean that every member of the Force will eventually have an official house, for this would have the effect that houses would probably stand empty, but wherever it is at all possible, 100 per cent housing will be provided. That is also why many hon. members will probably have noticed that wherever we are building police stations in the rural areas, or in other areas, we are making provision for housing at the same time. Along with the police station, four or five houses are built so that when a policemen is transferred to that place, there may be a house for him to live in; this is also done especially with a view to the fact that we compel policemen to go where we send them. That is why I think it is the responsibility of the State to provide them with housing wherever they may be transferred to. As I have said, this is not something which we can do immediately, but We shall do so as fast as we can.

I should like to announce that for the period 1970 to 1975 we plan to build no fewer than 949 houses for the police. This is the planning, but it is, of course, the Department of Community Development which will do this for us. We think that in that respect, too, we shall he able to do a great deal for the S.A. Police.

I was very satisfied with the hon. member for Umlazi to-day, but the other day I was not quite as satisfied with him. On Saturday, 5th September, there was an article in the Argus under the heading “Some policemen trigger-happy, says Natal M.P.”, and he was the man who had said it. Having said that they were “trigger-happy”, he went on to say—

Sir. I was wondering whether you would not allow the hon. member to demonstrate to us how he can run. [Interjections.] These statements by the hon. member were made by him further to a question which had been put here on how many people had been killed by the Police with firearms—I do not know exactly how the question was phrased—over a certain period of three years, and how many had been wounded. The number of persons killed and wounded was fairly high, and it was on the strength of this information that the hon. member subsequently made these statements. But there is something which I should like to tell the hon. member to-day. He wanted to know how many people had been killed or wounded, including terrorists, and the hon. member will, after all, not hold it against me if they shot terrorists wherever they came into contact with them. I am not going to tell the hon. member how many of them there were. It is not in the public interest to do so, but the fact of the matter is that the figures Which I gave him, since the question referred to people included everybody who had been shot or wounded by the S.A. Police during that period. In the light of these circumstances I can give him the assurance that it really was unnecessary for him to have drawn that conclusion. Our men are still running after their man, if it is necessary to do so. The hon. member also referred to our men who were doing duty on the border and who had to fight the terrorists, and he asked—with good intentions, so I accept—that a special medal be awarded to them. I want to tell him that I do not think we can see our way clear to doing so. From the nature of the case many of them receive recognition for their particular actions. The other day there was an interesting article in Die Burger on South African heroes on the borders; there was a photograph of Chaka, who was wounded and is blind to-day, and also of other policemen who had received the Police Star. They receive medals for the sacrifices they have made in the performance of their duties on the borders, and, in addition, they qualify for the ordinary medals of the S.A. Police. I should like to tell the hon. member that this duty which they are doing on the borders, is now being done by a large percentage of our Force, because as far as possible we want to afford everybody the opportunity of going to the borders. It would not be fair or just if we were only to single out a certain section of the Force for the purposes of being sent to the borders, and for that reason the hon. member should not draw the conclusion that only a very small part of the Police Force are being sent to the borders, and that they must be granted special recognition for such services. A substantially large percentage of the policemen in the Force are being sent there, in view of the fact that we only keep them there for three months at a time, after which they return; then others are trained, in turn, and sent to the borders, and in this way many of them are given a turn. It goes without saying that the men on the borders also receive a good additional allowance while they are there. The hon. member referred to the extraneous duties, to which I have already replied. He also said that some of our barracks were situated in very poor parts of the city. I agree, and we are trying to improve the position as far as possible. Old barracks are being replaced. In Johannesburg we now have the John Vorster Square, which is situated in a very good part of the city and about which there are actually no complaints. He also referred to temporary members. At the moment there are 1,090 temporary members in the Force. Policemen may retire at the are of 55. and it often happens that they retire on pension at the age of 55, but on the next day they are back in the Police Force, and they receive their pension plus their salaries and are actually better off than they would have been if they had stayed on. The hon. member pleaded for better conditions of service for the temporary members, but in the circumstances I do not think that there is much to complain about.

In regard to cases of assault: Reference was made to cases of assault; in fact, the question of assault was raised before, and I think it is very illuminating to look, for a moment, at the number of cases of assault that were taken to court, complaints against the S.A. Police. We are inclined to refer here only to those cases of assault with which the police are being charged—i.e. those cases of assault which were committed by the Police—and in many cases these were proved to have been unfounded. During the calendar year from 1st January, 1968, to 31st December, 1968, there were 2,323 charges of assault against the Police, all of which were investigated thoroughly. Eventually convictions were obtained in only 312 cases, or 13.4 per cent of the cases. The rest were mainly unfounded charges. During the 1969 calendar year there were 2,056 charges and only 298 convictions, or 14 per cent. In 1970, up to the present time, the figures are 947 as against 92 convictions, or 9 per cent. But in looking at cases of assault against the Police, one finds that during the year 1968 there were no fewer than 5,447 cases, of which 93 per cent were taken to court. In 1969 there were 5,537, of which 95 per cent were taken to court. In 1970, up to the end of June, there were 2,723, of which 96 per cent were taken to court. But, Sir, no reference is made to cases of assault against the Police; oh no, there is no concern for policemen being stabbed and beaten to death, but in a case where the police use too much force and it is subsequently interpreted as being assault, one hears about if often enough.

As regards the question of the mentally ill, which was raised here by the hon. member for Umlazi, I want to say that we agree with him. At the moment there is a commission which is inquiring into this matter.

As regards the revolver marksmen, I just want to tell him that the necessary shooting practices are being held regularly, and that amongst the police we do in fact have some of the best revolver marksmen in South Africa.

Sir, the hon. member for Hercules put forward a very good idea here. He put forward the suggestion that there should also be some sort of recognition for the reserve police. The recognition which we have already granted them so far, is that we have promoted 17 of them to the rank of officer. The conferring of officer’s rank on reservists actually amounts to a form of recognition; this is not something which they gain through qualification or study; it is merely a form of recognition which we confer on them. I think that for the moment we should resign ourselves to this measure of recognition which we are granting to these reservists. In due course we may perhaps grant an even greater measure of recognition to them. But. nevertheless, the idea of recognition, which the hon. member expressed here, is something which one can keep in mind.

Sir, now I come to the hon. member for Wynberg, and I want to say a few words on the Imam, to whom she referred. I do not know why the hon. member is so dissatisfied. I do not blame the hon. member for raising the matter here. After all, we ourselves have misgivings in regard to the matter, and it is for that reason that a further inquiry was instituted at the initiative of the Police.

But nothing happened.

I do not wish to say ugly things to the hon. member, but, surely, this is not true. The hon. member knows that a post-mortem examination was held, and if something had been found to be wrong at the post-mortem examination, surely the Attorney-General would have asked the police to lay a charge against a particular person or to investigate the matter. But the post-mortem examination was completed without another word being said. In spite of that, although the Attorney-General did not ask for anything to be done and was satisfied after the postmortem examination, the Commissioner of Police himself ordered that a further inquiry be made into the matter. Whom does the hon. member want to blame now? What more could the S.A. Police have done?

Why has it taken so long?

Sir, I have no objection to this matter being raised here by the hon. member; it is her duty, and she is quite entitled to raise it here, but what we do object to, is the suspicion with which she approaches the matter …

And the comments.

… and the terms which she uses and the comparisons which she draws. There is an old saying that “an Englishman never overstates his case”, but to-day she really did overstate her case. Let us understand each other clearly. I have no objection to her raising this matter, but a post mortem examination did take place. The Police requested another investigation at their own initiative, and this investigation was carried out. I told her that the file was being held back at the request of the Attorney-General, the reason being that he had said that he would like to handle the matter personally. That is why the file was held back. Last Monday, the 14th, he returned from his holiday, and what the hon. member apparently wants at the moment, is that the moment he enters his office, we should be there with the file. The file is being forwarded to him or is already in his possession; nothing is wrong in that respect, and he will examine the file. He returned from his holiday the other day and has hardly been back in his office for a week. In the light of these circumstances I think that the hon. member should really say that in this case the Police acted correctly, to her way of thinking, in that they had investigated the matter at their own initiative and had done everything in their power to investigate the matter.

Sir, the hon. member spoke about the evidence. The post mortem examination is not conducted by the police; it is conducted by the Department of Justice, and they decide what witnesses and how many witnesses are to be called. It is on that basis that it was decided that to call certain witnesses would merely amount to a duplication of evidence, and that it was unnecessary to lead further evidence. The hon. member quoted a great deal here from documents in order to show what had been said by witnesses at the post mortem examination. I think it is in fact important that I, too, should furnish the Committee with this information, although it does not have much of a bearing on the matter: it does not prove anything either way. However, I am going to quote it merely for the information of hon. members—

That is, the Imam’s detention—

I know them all.

We also want to know what they are.

Yes, the hon. members knows, but the rest of the House does not know them—

1. (1) He had instructions to recruit students who wanted to study abroad and young Moslems who wanted to go to Mecca as pilgrims and had obtained travel facilities, for the purposes of terrorist training in China;
2. (2) was concerned in the continuation of the activities of the banned P.A.C. organization and in recruiting members for it;
3. (3) received through several local banks thousands of rands from abroad for the purposes of unlawful utilization;
4. (4) contravened exchange control regulations by unlawfully taking thousands of rands out of the Republic of South Africa inter alia for political refugees abroad;
5. (5) visited the terrorist headquarters in Cairo and made contact with members of the P.A.C. movement;
6. (6) conducted discussions abroad with known terrorists and received their instructions;
7. (7) was constantly in secret contact with terrorists abroad.

Sir, I have read this merely for information purposes, in case you may think that this man was simply being detained without any reason.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? The hon. the Minister will know, since he has all the available information, that the Police gave a statement when this man was arrested to the effect that they knew from 1960 onwards that he was a security risk. Why, if he was a known security risk from 1960. according to the statement made by the Police themselves, was he allowed to go overseas in 1965 and in 1968 when they knew all these things about his activities?

Sir, I am not going to teach the hon. member all the Police methods to-day. These form part of the methods used by the S.A. Police. In all probability there were specific reasons why this was done. Let me give the hon. member the assurance that consequent upon information which had been obtained about him, other people were arrested and punished.

Does that justify besting him up?

Sir, this is the objection which I have against the hon. member. Now she wants to know, “Does that justify beating him up?” Who is she to want to be the Judge, the prosecutor and the witnesses?

And then, on top of it, the Opposition as well!

Sir, the hon. member for Sea Point mainly spoke here about the conditions of service of the Police. He said that there was no discipline; I think that was probably a slip of the tongue on his part.

No, I never said that.

He created the impression that if they were not paid more, there would not he proper discipline.

On a point of order, I did not say that.

The hon. member will simply have to read his Hansard again tomorrow. I just want to remove that impression. I do not think we can say that under the present conditions proper discipline does not prevail.

Sir, just for a moment I must come back to the hon. member for Wynberg again. She said that the same policemen had investigated this matter. That is not true, Sir.

I said the first investigations.

The post mortem examination was conducted by the Department of Justice, and the second investigation which was ordered by the Police, is being handled by the head of the Security Division.

I said that.

Sir, the hon. member for Rissik referred here to the police stations in his constituency. I just want to tell him that both Arcadia and Brooklyn appear on the programme of police stations which will be provided in due course.

The hon. member for Houghton referred to the Marais case, and said that the hon. member for Durban (North) might be satisfied, but that she was not satisfied. I have already dealt briefly with the Marais case, and I would just like to add this: We cannot and it would not be just and fair to dismiss from the Service simply every person who has committed an offence on the horizontal level, either upwards or downwards, as the case may be.

It was a very serious case.

It was a case of assault, but in this case the man appeared before a board, and the board investigated all the aspects of the matter. A moment ago I told the hon. member that, to my mind, one of the important reasons was the fact that this young man had only served in the Police Force for four years, and that he was under the influence of a very much older man, who actually did most of the mischief. This young man has an irreproachable record in the S.A. Police, and we cannot simply chase away men whom we have trained and who are prepared to do good work for us. But, of course, the hon. members has standards for the S.A. Police which are tremendously high, whereas she does not have the same standards for other people.

What do you mean by that?

In the hon. member’s eyes the S.A. Police are always in the wrong, irrespective of how high the standards may be, but she is always prepared to defend the criminals, the terrorist.

Rubbish! On a point of order, Sir, is the hon. the Minister allowed to say that I am always justifying the actions of terrorists? He implied it.

Order! The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Sir, we do after all know the hon. member; we do know what she does. If she would only rise here one day and say that the Police had at least done a good thing here or there, I would feel much happier than I do to-day.

I have.

If she does not do that, I think that she is very prejudiced.

The hon. member referred here to cases of assault. I have already dealt with the question of assault. In the case of Engelbrecht there was an agreement between the parties. Engelbrecht was a party to the agreement, and the agreement was that the amount of the compensation would not be disclosed.

I don’t think that you have any right to make such an agreement.

I am not in a position to-day to disclose that amount here.

As regards the pass laws, the hon. member also made certain statements here again. In that regard I just want to say briefly that from time to time the necessary instructions are issued to the South African Police on how to act in such cases. Here it is precisely a case of there being laws in the country which must be enforced. In such cases it is the duty, and very often the unpleasant duty, of the Police to enforce them. Several sets of instructions have been issued so far. The latest instructions were issued recently, on 17th August, and they read: “That members of the Police should afford Bantu who do not have their reference books on them, the opportunity of getting into touch with their employers and/or of getting their reference books.” I do not think the hon. member expects us to be more reasonable than that. They are supposed to have the reference books on them. The instructions that were sent out by the South African Police are that they should be afforded an opportunity of fetching their books.

I should like the hon. member, and other hon. members, to realize when she discusses the actions of the South African Police here, that for all practical purposes we are in a state of war. We are not only involved in a cold war, but also in a hard and heated war on our borders. For that reason it is necessary for the South African Police to take severe action and to detain people, to which the hon. member is objecting. These things are necessary. The hon. member will recall that during the Second World War, when circumstances were not very different, thousands of people were arrested here without trial. the time the law provided that a court would have no authority over their detention. I wonder whether at that time, when were up to 6,000 miles away from the scene of war. conditions were more dangerous for South Africa than they are at present. At present a great fuss is made whenever we bring to book in this country those who are undermining South Africa, the reason being that such persons are endangering her life and mine. I should like to give the assurance that, in spite of that hon. member, the Department of Police will continue to do its work.

The hon. member for Wonderboom referred to a monument for the South African Police. I just want to say that since the South African Police Force was established, as many as 600 members of the South African Police have been killed in active service. It has been decided to erect a monument in their honour. Money is being collected, and a great deal has already been collected for the purpose of erecting such a monument for those who were killed in the service of the South African Police. I hope with all my heart that the hon. member for Houghton will also contribute something to this fund!

The hon. member for Maitland said that there were policies under which the reservists were not covered. We have already investigated this matter before. The Commissioner of Police assured me that he had experienced problems before and had investigated the matter. For that reason I want to ask the hon. member for Maitland to bring such problems to my notice, if he has any.

The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (City) also raised here certain matters such as salaries, housing and dental services. I want to tell him that we have made attempts to get full payment in respect of dental services, but that we did not have any success in that regard in the past.

The hon. member for Johannesburg (North) also referred to the reservists. With reference to what he said, I want to assure him of the great appreciation which we have for the work which is being done by the reservists and for the extent to which they are assisting the police in their services. The work done by the police reservists is tremendously valuable, and we appreciate it. Then he referred to the conpensation which had been paid out to a certain reservist who, while he was on duty along with the Police, was killed. He thought that the compensation was insufficient. This is not a matter with which I can deal as easily as that, but in the meantime negotiations have taken place with the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner. When the compensation payable to such a reservist is being considered, it is being done as though he were a policeman on duty. In other words, when his case is being considered, the procedure followed, should be the same as would have been done in the case of a policeman who died on duty.

The hon. member for Christiana referred to vehicles. We have a large variety of vehicles in the South African Police, ranging from small ones to big ones. To a large extent we use Volkswagens for investigations and that type of work. Other than that we use, as circumstances demand, those vehicles which are best suited to the circumstances in question. The tendency which is gradually becoming more evident, is for more and more smaller vehicles to be used, since the smaller vehicles are so much more effective to-day. The hon. member also referred to narcotics. I can tell the hon. member that we have already sent overseas an officer, along with the commission, to investigate this problem.

The hon. member for Colesberg referred to people with long hair, and said that the Minister of Defence should simply take them to task. However, I am afraid that we cannot arrest these people if they have not committed any offence. However, I believe and trust that the Minister of Defence is doing a great deal in order to get them to wear their hair somewhat shorter.

The hon. member for Green Point raised the question of foot patrols once again. I want to tell the hon. member that he should not think that I differ with him to any great extent. I know that the foot patrol is an effective method of policing, and I have never disputed that principle. The foot patrol is an effective method of policing, but under the circumstances of our numbers and our manpower shortage …

The percentage is just the same.

No, wait a minute; the circumstances in South Africa are so different to-day that the number of policemen per thousand should actually be higher than it is at present. Other hon. Ministers will know that we have been instructed not to create posts which we cannot fill. What would be the use of my asking for a post structure which makes provision for an additional 5,000 or 10,000 posts, but which could not be filled? Then I would be in exactly the same position as I was.

A high percentage is not necessary.

If it had not been for the effective recruiting of the South African Police, we would not have succeeded in getting as many recruits as we are getting to-day. There are other factors which make the Police service an attractive one. This I admit. The hon. member had a great deal to say about salaries. In the South African Police there are quite a number of other factors which are in fact attractive.

Just start with the salaries.

However, the fact of the matter is that our numbers do not justify our having men on foot patrols. In the light of the circumstances of the limited numbers, I feel that we can provide better and more effective policing than we would if we were to have foot patrols. However, the hon. member should not think that we do not have any foot patrols at all. There are people doing foot patrols, and quite a number of them are in plain clothes. They are doing foot patrol duty particularly for the purpose of guarding against certain offences, such as handbag snatching and other offences of this nature. There are quite a number of policemen who are doing this type of work in the busy streets of Cape Town and Johannesburg. They are dressed in civilian clothes. I think we may as well conclude this matter. I agree with the hon. member that the foot patrol is still a very good and effective patrol service. However, at the moment we have these problems, and if it is at all possible for me to do so, and I shall concentrate on putting policemen on foot patrol duty in the cities. I shall do this with the greatest of pleasure, and I shall do my best in this regard.

Then the hon. member referred to the film “Women in Love”. I should like to know from the hon. member for Green Point the name of the person who made the complaint to him.

I received a letter.

The Police do not censor publications, etc.; this is done by the Publications Board, but the Police have certain powers under the Publications Act. The chairman of the Publications Board has explicitly requested the Police to help him. Now, hon. members should remember that all the cuts which have to be made in films, are published in the Police Gazette as soon as they have been made. Everybody in the Police Service can then take cognisance of the various cuts which have to be made in these various films. In this case a complaint was made and the Police went to ascertain what the position was. Apparently the necessary cuts in this film was made in respect of the words, but not in the …

The acts.

… in the film itself. The Publications Board specially requested the Police to pay attention to this matter.

To this specific film?

No, not in the case of this specific film. When the police suspect that something is wrong with a film, it is not they who pass judgment, but the matter is referred to the Publications Board in order that the latter may carry out the necessary investigations. I do not think the hon. member and I differ with each other as regards the procedure which is being followed in this regard.

I think I have now dealt with all the matters that were raised. In conclusion I just want to say that the hon. member for Bloemfontein (West) referred to the reservists, whose work we hold in such high esteem. I am sympathetic towards his suggestion that they should be provided with two uniforms, but at the moment we are still struggling to issue them with one uniform each. As far as shooting practices for them are concerned, I may just say that we shall consider this suggestion. I should also like to read what the hon. member for Sea Point said. He said: “If we want to maintain the discipline in this Force, and if the Minister wants to take strong action, we shall support him if he asks for better working conditions and salaries for the Police. I do not think that we always appreciate what a respectable and conscientious Police Force is worth to our country. To conclude where I started, I want to say that it would be a sad day for South Africa if we did not have a disciplined and respectable Police Force. We are running the risk of losing it.” This was said by the hon. member, but I want to make sure that the impression is not created that there are shortcomings in respect of discipline in the South African Police Force. I want to thank hon. members for the fruitful discussions which took place on this Vote.

Vote put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 41.—“Water Affairs”, R17,457,000. Loan Vote E.—“Water Affairs”, R100,525,000, and S.W.A. Vote No. 22.— I “Water Affairs”, R13,000,000:

Mr. Chairman, may I ask for the privilege of the half-hour? In the opinion of this side of the House, this Vote is one of the most important Votes that we have. As it is the Water Year, I think that most of us have had representations made to us in some form or other, in regard to the matters which various organizations and private individuals have felt should be raised under this particular Vote.

Mr. Chairman, year by year, as we come to this Vote, we have to deal with the situation which we are facing in our country, a situation which has been emphasized by the hon. the Minister himself, namely the paucity of our natural water supplies, our growing population, the demands that are being made by our industrial development for more and more water and the difficulty of dealing with the pollution of existing supplies. Our invironment is becoming more and more polluted. Amongst other elements pollution of our water supplies is taking place. We have, as has been pointed out before, come to accept drought as being a norm in respect of our climate in South Africa. Every year in some part or other of the country we have a drought; some of them are more widespread than others; some droughts affect certain areas very much more severely than others, and so on. In other words, the emphasis is placed on various parts of the country for a longer or shorter period.

For example, at the moment, after the very heavy rains that they had down at East London, and along the coast, those rains continued as very copious rains up into the southern part of Natal, and then virtually dried up. The result was that northern parts of Natal and the Zululand coast received no rain at all. My hon. friend, the member for Zululand, is not here. He and I have been in touch with those parts, he with his constituency and I through public interests which I have up there. We have been in touch with the northern part of Zululand right inland from the coast, all along from St. Lucia. Today the place is becoming a desert. Day after day, and even now as we sit here, the sun blazes down, fierce north-easterly winds blow, drying up everything. What little moisture was being carried forward over the winter months from early winter rains, has just disappeared. The area is facing a really great disaster at the present time.

This is now part of the pattern of our lives in South Africa. In these circumstances, one may extend a certain amount of sympathy to the Minister. I can understand what an effect it must have on his Department. When he has the lists of priorities all worked out for the whole of the Republic and droughts like these occur, the emphasis must be laid on a particular drought-stricken area or areas where there is a sudden imperative need for measures to be undertaken to assist those people in that area quickly because that is where the drought is hitting them unduly hard. This was never contemplated when the lists of priorities were worked out by the Department. We appreciate that. We appreciate also that, by and large, over the whole of the Republic our major municipalities, every one of them, are to-day facing a pontential shortage of water with one or two exceptions. There are exceptions.

I do not know whether Pietermaritzburg and Durban are actually facing a shortage with their resources of the Midmar Dam behind them now that it is full. There is a big supply there. Probably those two cities are both perhaps the most fortunate in South Africa. There may be other towns as well, but the fact is that our industrial development is consuming and polluting vast quantities of water. Industrialization is growing by the day. Our water supplies are not expanding. Drought conditions are hitting us very, very severely in places where the Minister has to make arrangements so as to try to deal with the crisis conditions which arise in those areas. So, against that background, may I say that we have in the past from this side of the House —the Minister has heard it before, as well as his predecessors going back many years— attempted to lay down certain principles which we believe are priorities. Sir, I do it again because I want to add to them.

Our first principle has been the need for a guaranteed supply of water to existing communities. That we have always put in the forefront. Whatever the policy and the priorities may be in regard to future development, the people are there, the existing communities, we believe should have an assured water supply.

That is principle number one, and by “community” I mean both rural and urban communities. We do not limit our definition so as to exclude rural communities. Secondly, we believe that adequate provision for the storage of water supplies should be undertaken in the high berg areas. This water can then be made available, as far as possible by gravity, to areas which may be droughtstricken on the one or on the other side of the high berg areas. Not very long ago I spoke to an eminent water engineer up on the Witwatersrand. He came forward with what he called “the grid system” for the high berg areas. This is a system which we on this side of the House have been preaching for some years. I now want to come to the third point, and I am glad that my friend, the hon. member for Etoshe is here. The third matter is what we on this side of the House call “the foreign adventure”, the investment of money in foreign ventures. As we watch the developments in our international relations and see what is going on in the countries on our borders, we see railway lines being built very closely to our northern borders by Chinese capital and labour and we see all sorts of international developments having repercussions in the economic field and in the military field and in the naval field, and affecting our security here in South Africa. Yet we go on and put our money into what we call “foreign adventures”. We have asked the predecessors of this hon. Minister to tell us about this expenditure of money. Let me name some of these ventures. There is, first of all, the Caborra Bassa scheme—the biggest of them all. Then we have the Oxbow scheme in Lesotho and the Kunene scheme up in South-West Africa. Insofar as South-West Africa is concerned, we regard the waters of the “Rivers of the North” as they are called in certain documents, to be necessary. We do not look upon those particular projects as being adventures. Here we have a clear-cut issue, that those waters are necessary for us in South Africa. That is clear; there can be “geen beswaar” against that. When we come to the Caborra Bassa and to Oxbow schemes I want to repeat a question which we have put before: “Is this partly intended as a fulfilment of a good neighbour policy based upon a policy decision by the Government at top level, which is of a diplomatic nature and not related to the actual physical benefits that accrue to South Africa, because we want the water and we want the electricity generated by the hydro-electric schemes set up there?” We get those benefits—we get the water, we get the electricity, but is there also a diplomatic objective behind it, a good neighbour policy, which for its fulfilment requires that we participate in the form of money, labour, etc., to build those schemes? If that is so, then we say to the Government that we consider that it should re-think this matter. We have come to a point where we believe that we should develop our own water resources within South Africa before going in for foreign adventures. There will be time, no doubt, for foreign adventures hereafter—if we have the money. But until such time as we have developed our own water resources, until such time as we have seen to it that we are not going to pollute our own water supplies, the money that is available—and hundreds of millions of rand are involved—must be utilized in our own country for the protection of what we have got; let us pull the weeds out of our own fields before we go to pull out the weeds from the fields of our neighbours enabling them to harvest a good crop of mealies, leaving us only with small cobs. This is the whole point in regard to these foreign adventures; it is plainly a question of self-interest, a question of spending our money to protect our own water supplies. You see, Sir, water to us is such a basic necessity upon which we as a country ultimately stand or fall.

The fourth aspect we also raised last year is that of apportionment. We feel that the time has come where there should be apportionment. Let me say that we believe it is beyond the wit of man to say how the development of South Africa will go. We cannot say what will happen in the field of oil discovery, mineral discovery and the creation of new growth points—for instance, a decision like that of the Government to build a railway line from Sishen to Saldanha Bay. We need water for that, vast quantities of water for such developments which may come out of the blue. The Minister cannot be blamed. While I shall blame him for everything I can, I cannot blame him for not having known three years ago that there was going to be a railway line from Sishen to Saldanha Bay. That will be the position also in the future. It is beyond the wit of man to say where our development will take us over the next four or five years. And what is five years in the life of a nation? My point is that there must be somewhere a reserve of water. Subject to that we also believe there should be apportionment. The various developing areas should more or less be told where they will get their water from so that they can know. To-day one can see the disposition of the water of every river in South Africa. We have no surplus; none in this year of 1970. One can see the disposition off all the water we have and we can tell those concerned that each has to do his best because that is all we have; when you have used that, you have used all. Do not let us allow huge industrial developments requiring vast quantities of water in an area where there is no water. This is subject to what I regard as the fourth aspect.

I now want to put forward the fifth aspect, the final point as far as United Party policy is concerned. We believe the time has come for us to spend vast sums of money on research. If we do not have the man, let us put as the top priorty of our requirements scientific knowledge and ability. If we can get a West German who cannot speak a word of English or Afrikaans but is a first-class scientist, let us pay the money to get him to this country. I am sure the officials in the Minister’s Department will have reason to know just what work to give him. Water is going to cost us in future vast sums of money, globular sums. Let us therefore spend large sums to-day on research so that we can tackle the question of purification, desalination, determine the laws governing our subterranean water supplies, etc. Let us spend vast sums on research, particularly in the field of desalination. Within the next few years we shall have power units pumping water for us, units which will have no relation to the internal combustion engine. We won’t even have internal combustion engines in our motor cars in a few years’ time. So we say: Let us spend big money on research.

What I have to say in the remaining part of my speech, will be based on these five aspects.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.

When the House adjourned on Friday, I was dealing with the five points which form the basis of the policy of this side of the House in regard to Water Affairs. Because our time is limited I should like to go on from where I left off. I emphasized the need for large sums of money to be spent on research and the need to bring in scientists from overseas for that purpose. I think this is of prime importance. We have before us the report of the commission into water matters, a report which has recently been published. I should like to refer to this report briefly. On page 161 the Minister will find 17 items which have been listed as being research projects, projects which should have received priority. We agree with every one of those 17 points. We also believe that we have neither the manpower nor the resources, unless we bring in research scientists from overseas, to carry out those projects. I am sure we have the money. In regard to this report in general, I should like to say that it is probably one of the most valuable reports we have had for many a long year, dealing as it does with a matter which is vital to the continued existence of civilization in this part of Southern Africa. In my opinion this report merited a full day’s debate and that a day should be set aside for that purpose. It is a very good report although I do not think it is exhaustive because there is more that can be said about this matter. During a discussion on the Minister’s Vote, hon. members only have 10 minutes speeches during which they mostly like to discuss matters concerning their own constituencies. Therefore this does not offer a good opportunity for a discussion of a report of this character. It is, as I have said, a very important report and merits at least one day of Parliament’s time in order that it may be discussed with all its ramifications after the fullest investigation has been made by the commission. Over four months we shall be back here for the next session. Can the hon. the Minister not go into the matter with the Leader of the House and with the other authorities to see whether we cannot have a full day to discuss this report—although we will not have a water year anymore because with every year that passes it will be more and more of a less water year.

Let me return to one of the points I dealt with on Friday, i.e. the question of pollution. There is hardly a paper you pick up that has no reference to the problem of pollution. I have here a German paper in which it is stated that the Rhine River is so polluted today that fishes can hardly live in it, despite the fact that they have spent R160 million over the last five years to keep the Rhine clear. But it is so polluted that despite that expenditure fish can hardly live in it. We should learn a lesson from other countries and take the necessary steps now to prevent something similar happening here. As it is, we have our own problem of pollution here. Silt is one of the problems. Then factory effluence and industrial effluence of all kinds also pollute our rivers. If we are to use the water that is available to us then we must keep it pure, unpolluted. We must deal with pollution at its source and not to allow it to come in first and then do what they have to do now in respect of the Rhine in an endeavour to rid it of its pollution. This is much too costly. Two years ago on this Vote we emphasized the necessity for the enforcement of the provisions included in the Act for the punishment of people who pollute our waters. Unfortunately this hon. Minister does not deal with the pollution of our environment as such and I wonder whether the hon. the Prime Minister, if I could appeal to him for a moment … Mr. Chairman, through you, can I appeal to the hon. the Prime Minister for one moment, to give me a minute of his attention? All right. Sir, somebody else shall have to ask him to do it. To my mind, to deal with the question of pollution of our environment, warrants a portfolio by itself. The ramifications of the pollution of our air, water and even our soil itself, through various types of intractable insecticides—all these aspects of pollution interlock and overlap the portfolios of different Ministers. Bantu areas, for instance, fall under the Minister of Bantu Administration; Water Affairs falls under this hon. Minister; Forestry under that; Agriculture under another one; and so Lands, Harbours under others, all these Ministers are interlinking. But, Sir, I believe that this matter is of such importance that the appointment of a Minister to deal with the pollution of our environment in South Africa would be well justified, because even if final autocratic powers were not given in a Statute, then at any rate he could get his colleagues together with a view to seeing whether they could not work out some form of co-operation so that pollution could be dealt with at the source to avoid this kind of thing that is happening in the Rhine at the present time. Sir, I am grateful to the hon. the Prime Minister for giving me a few minutes of his time.

Sir, at the present time we have people like the sugar industry suggesting a water resources board, and this is what is going to happen: Localized interests are going to try to protect their own rights to water. Sir, that is not the answer to the problem. Water is South Africa’s water to-day, and more and more it is coming to be seen as South Africa’s water; from the report that we have before us it is quite clear that that is what the commission has found. Sir, I want to put specific cases to the hon. the Minister in regard to this question of enforcement. We have here a report from the Natal Municipal Association, which dealt with the pollution of the Umzimkulu River and the threat to it. Here is one of the greatest rivers that we have in Natal; it is potentially one of the most beneficial, and it is continually threatened by pollution from industrial effluent. When I was a boy it was 60 ft. to 70 ft. deep; it was a clear, running river, and today it is two or three feet deep and you can wade across it with the water hardly above your knees. This is the kind of thing that is happening. Sir, what worried me was to read in this report that a representative of the Department of Water Affairs who was at that meeting of the Natal Municipal Association, said this in reply to claims that there should be enforcement of the law dealing with pollution—

Sir, I do not know whether that is correctly reported, but once the Department gets the idea that it must not be continually involved in court cases, then what happens to enforcement? Sir, on the select committee which dealt with the 1956 Water Bill, which is now an Act, I pleaded for an enforcement agency, and the present Minister’s predecessor said that the enforcement agency would be the Department of Water Affairs; that they would act as policemen.

To-day throughout the length and breadth of Natal we are getting voluntary organizations dealing with pollution on the coast, in the sea, in our estuaries and in the rivers. Sir. when a case is put forward and it is reported in the Press that a representative of the Department of Water Affairs gave that reply to the Natal Municipal Association, then I can see why there is very widespread disapproval and disappointment. Because, Sir, it is not sufficient now simply to try to keep our rivers pure. The time has come when we have to keep the sea pure. Here is a report in an American journal with regard to drums of poison gas and so forth being thrown away into the deep blue sea; they say that it will be safe there because it is at the bottom of the deep blue sea. But all over the world it is becoming apparent now that you can pollute the sea just as you can pollute our rivers and lakes. There is already evidence from our own South Coast coastline that pollutants that are coming down our rivers are killing off the marine animals; the marine biology along our coastline is being detrimentally affected by pollutants coming down our rivers, and so, Sir, this sorry tale goes on.

It is no good our having teeth in our legislation if that legislation is not enforced, enforcement as to the standards of purity and then the strongest action against the biggest and the strongest financial houses in South Africa, if necessary. If the hon. the Minister does that, he will have the people of South Africa behind him and he will have this Parliament behind him. I know some of the difficulties; I know how these big strong financial interests are prepared to take advantage if they get half the opportunity to do so. What we are faced with in South Africa now is the need to conserve our present water, the need to re-cycle it, to purify and to use it, to find the laws that govern it and the laws that govern our underground water supplies; and there, Sir, we come to the question of St. Lucia, this wonderful national asset which to-day is dying. I mention St. Lucia and the Umzimkulu River this year as two of the essential features which in my opinion merit the personal attention of the Minister. In regard to St. Lucia the Minister said that he accepted the responsibility of finding fresh water as a dilutant. Here we have the position where sea parity is about, I think, 35 parts of salt per 1,000, and in some parts of St. Lucia it is over 100 parts to-day. Everything is dead. The whole of the marine life, the vegetable life, the reeds, the papyrus—everything is dead because of the high salinity. The Minister has said that he will accept responsibility. Short term and long term, Sir, we must save St. Lucia, and short term and long term we want the Umzimkulu to be saved because we need its water for the whole of the development of the lower South Coast. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for South Coast made a few general statements here with which I agree in general, but which I do not want to go into in detail. I just want to say that in principle we agree with the idea he put forward here in the concluding portion of his speech, i.e. the importance of keeping our rivers clean and the process of guarding against pollution. As he mentioned, there were other countries that only discovered or noticed the tremendous damage and danger from the pollution of their water resources at a very late stage. I hope our country will to a large extent be spared this because We shall begin in time.

Earlier in his speech the hon. member also referred to what he termed as so called “foreign adventures”, referring to our contact with neighbouring states and bur plans for harnessing water for specific purposes, where possible, even from outside the Republic of South Africa. On this occasion the hon. member even spoke, a little Afrikaans, and said “we have no objection”. This reveals a very favourable attitude. I just want to tell the hon. member that as far as this matter is concerned he may be sure that-where our Government is engaged in so-called “foreign adventures”, referring to the Cabora-Bassa, the Oxbow, the Kunene River and those planned water schemes, the “good neighbour policy” to back up those plans is in fact an integral part of our overall planning. In fact, the linking up and the planning to obtain and utilize water from those particular sources, are part and parcel of a “good neighbour policy”. There is no doubt about that; it is actually a direct result of that, and will be backed up further and expanded upon. There were in fact a few very topical matters which created the opportunity for our Government to move in that direction and do important work.

I also want to tell the hon. member that we appreciate the fact that he emphasized a very important principle of the Physical Planning Act here—when he speaks straight from the heart, he frequently displays strong Nationalist sentiments. He emphasized that no large scale, or as he put it vast developments are being encouraged in areas where there is no water. I just want to point out to the hon. member that here he is actually supporting the cardinal principle of the Physical Planning Act, and that we have absolutely no objection to his doing so. I just hope he will use his good influence on that side of the House, so that this principle, as embodied in the Physical Planning Act, will be generally accepted by us.

To return to the general discussion, I want to say that both sides of the House appreciate it very much that in these times water and water conservation in South Africa has been urgently accentuated by the hon. the Minister and by our Government. I think the hon. the Prime Minister’s view of the matter was correct when he entrusted water conservation and provision and planning to a Minister as his principle commission, and almost as his exclusive commission. I want to say that the hon. the Minister has succeeded, since he accepted responsibility for this Department, not only in dealing with present situations but also In mobilizing us and attuning us to look to the future. That is why it is with appreciation that we received this report of the commission of inquiry and we should also like to listen to its comment on this matter. There is, as the hon. member for South Coast was quite right in saying, such a broad field and so many interesting matters that they are impossible to cover in a few hours time with ten minute speeches. We should very much like to hear the comments of the hon. the Minister in regard to a few of the cardinal points, and in regard to certain matters we should like to have a reassurance from him. It was stated very specifically by this commission that the estimated maximum yield of our water supplies will by the end of this century have been more or less depleted. This means in other words that the demand will absorb the water yield. When we present these matters to the public it is almost as if our people take fright because the question of what will happen then involuntarily occurs to them. Fortunately it is the case that the hon. the Minister in his approach— he did this in regard to the appointment of the commission of inquiry—does in fact want to help us to plan properly, particularly with a view to that shocking truth which is staring us in the face. He wants to help us to be sparing with our water supplies, to develop new water resources so that it will be possible to meet the future requirements. It is interesting to note that on page 2 the report of the commission mentions that the problem of where South Africa will find its water in the distant future, i.e. after the year 2000, lies therein in the first place that emphasis must be placed on the improved development and utilization of our natural resources and available water supplies; secondly that emphasis should be placed on the more effective use of available water, the re-use of city effluent, and the more effective use of water in irrigation. I think our farming community, particularly those living in areas where there is an abundant supply of water, will also have to learn that one cannot simply use water as long as it is available. They will also have to learn to give a proper account, themselves, of the economic and thrifty use of water. Thirdly, the commission emphasizes the creation of new water resources. Of these the most important is Probably the future development of the desalination of sea water, with the aid of nuclear energy.

All these factors place emphasis on the major problem. We are grateful that the hon. the Minister has brought this matter so specifically to our attention and that this Commission report has afforded us an opportunity of taking a proper look at these matters. Not only this Parliament, but also our people as a whole will have to take a proper look at this situation and give it thorough consideration. We will have to give a thorough account of the limited water supply which is at our disposal. Inter alia, the Commission also found that 27 per cent of the water of our existing Hams is being lost through evaporation. This is a further very urgent problem and the question is what we are going to do in that connection. The commission report mentions variable draft as one of the methods with which we can save the water in our existing dams. we should also like the hon. the Minister to give attention to this matter as well and we would be pleased if he could furnish this house with a little more information and clarity in regard to this possible method of saving water.

In addition we are very grateful that we see from all this that the Minister is not only emphasizing the problem, but that he is also emphasizing the need for planning and that it is to-day one of the most important tasks of the Department to plan the water resources and supplies from our available resources, as well as the utilization of water, as well as possible. Let me point out that nowadays the Select Committee on Irrigation Matters deals from time to time with schemes which have been laid out, undertakings which have been made, of loans which have been allocated and of people Who have settled somewhere and who have found themselves in the position that there is no water available. Now the question arises as to whether the planning in many of the existing projects had been thorough enough. The question arises as to whether there is a long-term record which was referred to and whether an assured supply was taken into account as basic requirement. This should have been taken into account in determining the size of the lay-out of a specific scheme. I think our country is losing a great deal of money and many of our people are suffering hardships to-day because schemes were laid Out on too large a scale for the available water supply on a long-term basis. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, this being Water Year, I think it is extremely important that we recognize and that we bring to the fore in this debate the fifth principle which has been adopted by our party, namely that of research. As hon. members know we put forward four principles three or four years ago when the hon. J. J. Fouché was Minister of Water Affairs. We have been building on those principles and have adopted this year as a basic principle of water policy that research should be followed to the absolute maximum not only of the Department’s resources, but the resources that can be exploited overseas, and that more money should be made available to the Department of Water Affairs for that specific purpose.

We have a problem in South Africa which is perhaps unique. Whereas overseas countries have immense pollution problems they also have immense supplies of water. The attempt to equate our pollution problem with the problem in America is not even a fair comparison in that our water supplies are so completely limited that the need for us to combat pollution is far more intense and greater than it is in the United States. This question of pollution is becoming increasingly important. As the hon. member for South Coast has said hardly a day goes past that there is not a report of the pollution of water in some area or other. Even in the glossy magazines of South Africa pollution is becoming an important feature of our national life about which the public is becoming increasingly concerned. I would like the hon. the Minister to make some kind of a statement during his reply to this debate, because every kind of industrial activity involves the pollution of water. It is impossible to produce anything without some kind of pollution taking place and I think it is important for the Minister to establish in the minds of the public that some degree of pollution will have to be tolerated. The question is what degree, and whether the Minister can devise means whereby the Bureau of Standards, or some other bureau or the Department itself, will set down standards which have to be followed and which will be enforced. We have read in reports that as far as the pollution of the Tugela River is concerned the Department has a standard whereby a certain amount of matter will not be tolerated in water above a certain level. But without some kind of an enforcement agency in the Department itself to which cases like these can be referred I think we are running the risk of these things simply slipping by without coming to the attention of the Department, and as the hon. member for South Coast has said, without prosecutions taking place. Without prosecution the whole battle against pollution will be without any point at all.

One of the things that worries me in my own constituency is that the Anglo American Corporation is building a pulp milland that the effluent which is not able to be purified is going to be irrigated upon an area of ground of some 400 acres which has been purchased for the purpose. I wonder whether enough research has been done to make sure that this is not merely another way of deferring the immediate pollution of the river. The problem there is sodium salts which are contained in the effluent that is irrigated upon the ground. During periods of heavy rain will it not happen: that these sodium salts will simply leach out into the water and so result in the eventual pollution of that stream itself?

Into the Umzimkulu River.

Yes, that is the Umzimkulu River which was referred to by the hon. member for South Coast.

I Want to ask the hon. the Minister another question. How long cart South Africa, with its very limited water resources, afford to use water for sewerage purposes? To-day we are using one of our most precious national assets merely to move human waste from one place to another. When I talk about research I am deadly serious. There must be other possible means which can be used to dispose of human wastes.

I cite a case in point in the Arctic, where several big oil companies were drilling for oil. It is impossible to use normal means of sewerage. You cannot do it, because the ground is in that condition of perma-frost that it never thaws out below about six feet down from the surface. But there are two fairly big settlements or large towns which operate a normal sewerage disposal scheme without water at all. I wonder whether we in South Africa have not reached the stage where we are going to have to investigate some other means of disposing of human waste other than by merely using water as a means of conveying it from one place to the other. If the water is polluted, it can be repurified and used again. But we are going to reach a point one of these days when water is going to be too important in our national economy to be used simply for that purpose. I believe that this question merits the attention of the Department and a great amount of research on what can be done, on the question of whether it can be done by means of a closed circuit evaporation of water by the use of heat, or whatever it might happen to be. But there should be some approach made to find some alternative means, so that the water which is going to play an increasingly important part in our national production, shall be spared for some other more productive purpose.

The hon. member for Piketberg mentioned just briefly the question of desalination and the use of nuclear power stations for generating power. We all know that this is something which involves incredible amounts of power. Recently there was a symposium held, at which the chairman of the Atomic Energy Board, Dr. Roux, said that as matters are today, desalination of water, even by means of power generated by a nuclear power station, is not going to be economic in South Africa and probably will not become economic. But again I think the question comes up that if one does not have the water, any means of finding the water becomes economic. I wonder whether the hon. the Minister, for argument’s sake will not give me some information regarding my own area in Natal. The total amount of water in the Umgeni River has been allocated and will be utilized in the year 1985. Then it becomes a question of the relative cost of conveying alternative water. I wonder whether there is not now a case for a new look at desalination from the point of view of the alternative costs. Because it is not simply a question of the basic cost, whether it is R2,000 for 1 million gallons, or whatever it might happen to be. The question is what it is going to cost as an alternative to provide water which might well be allocated to another area. I believe this again is a question of bringing together the relevant facts, the costs involved and the future pattern of development in South Africa to the point where desalination will become a practical reality. It is used to-day in Kuwait to generate 7 million gallons of water a day, simply because there is no other water. There it is economic. I wonder when the stage is going to be reached in certain of the areas of our country when it is going to become economic, because there are absolutely no other sources of water at all.

I would like to raise one matter which is a parochial matter in my constituency. That is the question of the pipeline from the Midmar Dam down to the purification works at Umlaas Road, which is intended to serve Pinetown, Cato Ridge, Hammarsdale and all the areas down towards Durban with purified water. I do not know how accurate my information is —I have not been able to find out—but I have been informed that this pipeline has hardly run satisfactorily since the time it was brought into operation. I have heard various rumours as to the cause. I do not know whether it is due to a dispute between the rubber company which is manufacturing the pressure plates which fit into the pipes, whether it is the fault of the pipes themselves or whether the design is wrong so that the pipes are not strong enough to take the pressure. But certainly my information is that that pipeline has not served the purpose for which it was designed. It is rot delivering the water for which it was designed and has been operating in a totally unsatisfactory manner. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister what the position is in that area, if this pipeline is going to play a very important part indeed in the whole development of the lower area of Natal down towards Durban or not. I think the Minister has a great responsibility to see that it operates satisfactorily, to put the blame on the right quarters and to ensure that steps are taken to put it right.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Mooi River will pardon me if I do not follow him in his speech. I should like to put a few matters in connection with my constituency. Since we are in the Water Year, I think it is appropriate that at the beginning of my speech I should on behalf of this House convey our congratulations to the hon. the Minister and his department for the wonderful way in which we have in the Water Year been made aware of the water problems in South Africa. I am particularly deeply impressed by the way in which the city dweller has become aware of the scarcity of water in our country. I think it is appropriate to say to-day that since there has been a tremendous shortage of water in cities which previously never had water problems, the city dweller has in fact become conscious of the scarcity of water and is acting accordingly.

I wish to refer to the payments made by the department in regard to the sinking of boreholes. Rebates where State boringmachines were used amounted to R2,971,000 in 1967-’68, and payments to private contractors amounted to more than R1 million, a total therefore of almost R4 million. In 1968-’69 the amount was approximately R3½ million. On behalf of the stock farming areas, I should like to convey my sincere thanks to the hon. the Minister and his department for the wonderful privilege we are enjoying of also being able to sink boreholes by means of private boring-machines in order to meet the problems in this way. The high risk, especially in the Karoo, in regard to the sinking of boreholes is covered to a large extent by the department’s scheme according to which a subsidy is paid on a sliding scale. I should like to express my sincere thanks for that. We know that particularly during the past few years of drought the water table has dropped tremendously in the Karoo. As a result of that, a tremendous number of problems have arisen in connection with bore holes drying up, etc. This scheme has provided a very great deal of help to our stock farmers as far as the provision of water for small stock is concerned. I should also like to congratulate the inspectors on the quick finalization of certain matters after a borehole has been sunk, as well as the payment of the subsidies. I think they are performing wonderful work and are making great sacrifices. Sometimes they have to work under very difficult circumstances and must cover great distances. I should just like to ask, if it is possible, whether the applications which are submitted, cannot perhaps be dealt with a little more expeditiously.

Mr. Chairman, my actual purpose in getting up is to speak about two aspects affecting my constituency which I regard as very important. The first is in connection with the Vanrynevelds Pass Dam at Graaff-Reinet. For all practical purposes, this dam has been empty since the 1964-’65 season. We have suffered a tremendous drought over these years. The lack of water in Graaff-Reinet is impeding the development of the town and its vicinity tremendously. We know that Graaff-Reinet is an exceptionally large educational centre. We also know that Graaff-Reinet actually lends itself to large-scale development if the impending factor of water were not present. Naturally, there was also a tremendous shortage of water for irrigation purposes. There is an agreement in connection with the use of water from the Vanrynevelds Pass Dam, namely that a certain amount must remain for the use of the inhabitants of the town and for domestic use. The result is that, practically speaking, the irrigation farmers below the Graaff-Reinet Dam have had no irrigation water for four of five years. Tremendous capital expenditure was required to establish the irrigation land there. As a result of the lack of water, heavy losses were suffered by the irrigation works there. If those irrigation farmers could have had a normal supply of water in this period of drought, a large quantity of roughage could have been produced for the area. This would have lightened the burden on other parts in regard to the provision of roughage.

I have the following proposal to make. The White Paper in connection with the use of water from the Orange River project provides for water from the Orange River to flow through a tunnel to the Vanrynevelds Pass Dam. This tunnel is called the Wapadsberg tunnel. I also know that according to the White Paper this tunnel will come into operation during the third phase only, and that this Government is only committed to the first phase of the White Paper in regard to the Orange River project. I want to ask for matters to be reconsidered in this respect, especially since such a tremendously large area is affected. I want to ask that a start be made in the meanwhile with the surveying of this tunnel, and that the preliminary work be done, especially as a result of the fact that the staff are available at the Hendrik Verwoerd dam and that it will therefore perhaps be cheaper at this stage. I want to make an earnest plea that the building of the tunnel should perhaps be expedited, especially since we have heard from the hon. the Minister about the wonderful new tunnel-digging machine which is going to be used in the case of the Fish River canals in order to provide water to the lower Sundays River. I want to make an earnest plea that the Minister and his department thoroughly investigate this matter in order that they may perhaps be able to expedite this work, because Graaff-Reinet as such must, because of its circumstances, inevitably become a growth point and because it lends itself to development, especially to industrial development. Therefore I ask whether serious attention cannot perhaps be given to this matter.

The second matter, which is also very closely concerned with my constituency, is the Beervlei Dam. This dam was originally built as a flood water control scheme for the Gamtoos Valley. I want to say that it served its purpose exceptionally well, especially in 1961 and again in 1963, in that it prevented very serious flood damage in the Gamtoos Valley. In the meanwhile, the riparian owners along the Great River, which later becomes the Gamtoos, have used this water very effectively. The problem has arisen that there are no canals along which this water can be distributed. The river bed forms a canal of approximately 115 miles from the dam to the end of the irrigation area. The costs of the irrigation are tremendously high, because the farmers themselves must abstract the water. At the moment there are no fewer than 35 such pump units, which, of course, makes the irrigation very expensive. The main problem, however, is the brack which forms in the Great River. This brack forms as a result of the drainage of the irrigation system. As a result of that, a tremendous stream of water has to be released from the dam in order to wash this brack away. We have found that approxinately 55 to 60 per cent of this water is wasted on cleaning the river before it can be used for irrigation. In the drought period from February to March, 1969, 22 morgen feet of water flowed into the dam. According to our calculations, only 9,000 morgen feet of this water could be used. The rest was used to wash the river clean. I do not want to go into details about the potential, but I want to say that there is a tremendously large irrigable area available below the Beervlei dam. My plea to-day is that the Minister and his department should investigate whether it is not possible to use this water more effectively by means of system of canals or even, alternatively, by means of a pipeline in order to combat this large-scale waste which is taking place.

In conclusion I want to say that Steytlerville is situated on the banks of this river and has for years been struggling with a tremendous water shortage: In actual fact they have no municipal water there. Perhaps the problems of this small town, which is doomed to failure if it cannot obtain water, can be solved by this system of canals, and this would earn the Minister and his department the deep gratitude of the community in that area.

I want to participate in the debate at this stage, as a result of the remarks made by the hon. member, for South Coast and the hon. member for Piketberg on the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Matters. I agree with hon. members that this Commission brought out a particularly important report. It is about this report that I want to say a few things at the moment. The Commission had lengthy terms of reference and these can be summarized as an instruction to appraise the water situation in South Africa, particularly with reference to certain aspects thereof, aspects such as the following: The total amount of water available; the claims of the various interest groups; the availability of water at present and in the future; the economic development taking place in our country and its influence on our available water; the availability of resources and their protection; the planning of the availability of Water for the present and the future; the financial implications of obtaining for South Africa an assured supply of water; and the costs involved in making this water available. I think that we can summarise in this way the Very important terms of reference of the Commission, as they were originally formulated.

The report of the Commission states facts and circumstances which indicate one thing— that South Africa Will be entering a period of water shortages unless the necessary arrangements are taken in good time to prevent the bottlenecks. The Commission itself sees the solution to the situation in three directions. The hon. member for Piketberg referred to that. In the first instance there is the development of the existing natural resources, in other words all the surface and subterranean resources as they occur in nature. Secondly, there is the effective application of the already developed resources, in other words. sources which we are already utilizing and, thirdly, the creation of new resources. These are the three directions in which the Commission sees a solution. Then the Commission goes on to lay down certain guiding lines, and because this is actually What this entire report deals with, it is impossible for me to deal with the matter in a few words. Nor do I want to take up too much of the hon. members’ time with this. I just want to say a few things which, to my mind, also summarise the essentials. The Commission sees a solution in the correct and timeous exploration, planning, devising and construction of schemes. In addition it sees a solution in the planning of the allocation and application of water. That is as succinctly as I can put it. In addition the Commission regards it as being of importance that scientific research workers should, in the process, be called in to be of assistance in this planning. In fact, the Commission sees a major solution in the utilization of science to assist in the development of new resources. Then, too, the Commission sees proper control systems in South Africa, the control of the total utilization of water, as being of the utmost importance. In addition the Commission sees it as urgent and necessary that planning should be done in good time, and that the financial implications of the creation of an assured water future should be seen to. The Commission itself has come up with many stimulating and clear ideas on the financial implications in so far as water development, particularly considerations in regard to costs, are concerned. There are many considerations in regard, to costs which have to be weighed up. And then, what is also important, is the recovery of costs. Costs are in future going to play an important role, because astronomical amounts are going to be required from the country to meet the situation. Water must be made available to the entire country, and that is why the calculation and the, recovery of costs is of the very utmost importance. It is in this direction that the Commission saw, its task. In its report the Commission gave particular attention to a correct postulation of the situation, as well as to stimulating ideas for coping with the situation and thinking along stimulating lines in order to arouse the entire country to consider its findings and reflect soberly on. these. I think the Commission did this very well.

The report of the Commission indicates to South Africa a further important matter, which is that the country does have a great water future provided we do the right thing in good time. This year is Water Year and this has led to the water situation in South Africa being brought to the attention of our people as thoroughly as possible. In fact, there are few people in our country who have not been impressed with the importance of water—not only as regards the enormity of the problem facing us. but also as regards the realization of the importance of the co-operation of all interested groups, co-operation in order to cope with the overall situation. The Government itself is fully aware of the magnitude and urgency of the situation. In my opinion those guiding lines which the Commission indicated in its report are the only logical guiding lines which a country must follow if it wants to solve this problem. That is why I think we will all be delighted; to hear, that the Government is prepared to accept the report of this Commission in toto, and that we accept the report with the intention of carrying out the recommendations contained therein. Although I have said that we accept the report in toto. I want to add that there are one or two less important changes which I shall subsequently indicate. However, this does not detract one iota from the essence of the report. In fact, as far as the principles contained in the recommendations of the Commission are concerned, the report is accepted in its entirety. It is with very great pleasure therefore that I am able to say that this report is accepted by the Government as it stands.

Sir, I think we will all agree that it is necessary for South Africa to have a master water plan. A country can only make progress if it is able to create for itself the guiding lines of such a master water plan. As far as I am concerned, the guiding lines contained in this report comprise the master water plan of South Africa. I think the guiding lines which have been laid down, the recommendations which have been made, are correct and in their correct perspective as far as the postulation of facts is concerned. The findings are well thought out. The document before us, is authoritative, and I think the Commission deserves a vote of thanks from this House and from the entire country for this excellent report which it compiled. Sir, on receiving the report of the Commission the hon. the Prime Minister conveyed the gratitude of the Government to Dr. S. P. du Toit Viljoen, as chairman, and to the members of the Commission. I should like, on this occasion, to add both my thanks and that of the Department of Water Affairs. I want to thank the chairman of the Commission. Dr. Viljoen, very cordially for his guidance and for the insight he displayed in guiding this Commission in the submission of this report. I think the members of the Commission all deserve a cordial vote of thanks from the House, and I gladly convey this to them. I think that all the officials concerned in this matter, deserve to be thanked by the House. There are many officials who assisted. The officials of my Department did a great deal of work in the background: a vast amount of background service was rendered, particularly in compiling and processing documents for the, Commission. Without their assistance the Commission would not have been able to have made such good progress with its work. I want to convey to them in particular my thanks. I think the Committee will allow me to say that this report was made possible because the present Secretary for Water Affairs, Mr. Kriel, was seconded for a very long time and was in the service of the Commission on a full-time basis in order to assist it in compiling this report. He made a particular contribution to the compiling of the report, and, apart from the chairman, I should also like to single out Mr. Kriel and to thank him cordially for his contribution in this connection.

Mr. Chairman, you will allow me to take the report itself now and to make a few remarks about the recommendations contained therein. I do not know whether hon. members have the report before them. If you would glance at the recommendations of the report —and I begin with recommendation No. 1— you would see that recommendations Nos. 1 to 5 deal with thorough planning of water schemes, effective conservation, efficient utilization, planning of water resources, and so on. These recommendations, from 1 to 5, are accepted without reservation. Recommendations Nos. 6 and 7 deal with the allocation of water to various sectors and to various regions. I am mentioning this separately because I want to recommend that hon. members read these recommendations in particular, because they are important and are well set out. I have already emphasized the essence of these recommendations in the past. I suggest for the consideration of the House that hon. members will derive great benefit from making a study of the arguments here, for this was for a long time also what the Department thought about this matter. In regard to these two recommendations I just want to make a few remarks. In the first place there cannot be an unrestricted growth of industries where there is a shortage of water or where it can only be made available at great expense. That is why the decentralization of water-intensive industries in particular will be encouraged; that they should go to growth points where there is adequate water available. Secondly I want to emphasize that nature conservation areas—and this includes the area from the Kaoko Veld up to the southernmost point of South Africa—have as legitimate a claim to water, and are therefore also entitled to water development works for their requirements. We are so inclined to forget nature. Thirdly, I want to say that emphasis should be placed on the development of ground-water resources before water is brought in from elsewhere, provided the yield capacity of the ground-water resources makes this possible. I am mentioning this for a Very specific reason. It has apparently become the fashion to demand that water be delivered through long pipelines from the nearest large dam, wherever it may be. This water is usually very expensive. The standpoint now is that before we bring in expensive water from elsewhere, we must see what we have ourselves. This applies in particular to the Karoo towns, where people with small requirements want water conveyed over very long distances, which will make the unit costs very expensive. I am thinking now of a certain case where the unit costs will be something in the order of R9 per 1,000 gallons. This does not pay, and we must therefore do what is necessary to find the water in the immediate vicinity. Fourthly, I want to say in regard to these two important recommendations that it is not right to make demands merely on geographical or sentimental grounds; it is correct that water should be used where it has fallen or occurs in rivers, but the overriding principle which should apply is that water should be utilized where, on socio-economic grounds, it will be of the greatest benefit to the country as a whole, after existing local requirements which are legitimate and therefore justifiable, have been satisfied. I am making this very clear because the argument is so often put forward that because water is local, it must inevitably be used locally. We do not think so. Water is being used where the country needs it, taking into consideration legitimate local claims.

I am going on to recommendation No. 8, which deals with groundwater. In this connection I should like to announce that the Department of Water Affairs has already proceeded to establish a “Scientific Services” division. I am also saying this for the benefit of the two gentlemen who spoke to-day on the opposite side. That was correct, and I share their views on the necessity for scientific services. As far as this matter is concerned, I want to say that the Government has already proceeded to develop a Scientific Services division which will render hydrological and research services, particularly with a view to the subterranean water situation, as recommended by the Commission. As in the past, it will co-operate with the Geological Survey division. Now hon. members will note that I have not accepted this simply as it was recommended, and that is why I am indicating this. The recommendation was that the Geological Survey division should pilot the undertaking to study the ground-water situation and to accept responsibility for that. Unfortunately I cannot agree with the Commission in its recommendation that the primary responsibility for these services should fall to the Geological Survey division. I foresee, however, that there will be closer co-operation between the Department of Water Affairs and the Geological Survey division in regard to areas where mining rights are being exercised and where the inter-related water and mining interests make it necessary for the Department of Mines and Water Affairs to co-operate in exercising the necessary control. That is why I do accept the recommendation that an interdepartmental committee be established by the Department of Water Affairs which will undertake the management and the control thereof in dolomitic areas. This is also where mining activities are being carried out. Contributions in the sphere of ground-water research by the Geological Survey division will in any case be welcomed at all times.

Recommendations Nos. 9 to 11 deal with water utilization or utilization of irrigation water, and the development of irrigation schemes. These recommendations are accepted in their entirety. Recommendations Nos. 12 to 31 deal with the re-use of water, protection against pollution, evaporation, better protection and utilization through effective management and control of run-off and catchment areas, and water savings in power generation. I agree with the Commission on its recommendations it made, and I am glad that we are able to accept, without reservation, all the recommendations from 12 to 31 in their entirety.

Recommendations Nos. 32 to 35 deal with water consumption for household purposes and the possibilities of savings in the daily use through the introduction of water saving measures and the water saving apparatus which can be utilized. These recommendations are accepted without reservations. Recommendations Nos. 36 and 37, which refer to the desalination of sea water and the abstraction of water from the air, as well as the necessary research in this connection, are accepted as they stand. As regards recommendations Nos. 38 to 43, these recommendations relate to a realistic price policy, an effective cost division in the Department, water tariffs, financing and subsidization and related matters. These recommendations are also accepted as they stand.

In recommendation No. 44, in other words, the second last recommendation, the Commission recommends that the Planning Advisory Council of the Prime Minister should establish a special standing committee for water affairs which will synchronize the planning of water development with the general physical planning for other developments. I regard this idea as a very fruitful one. An opportunity for the co-ordination of all interests and factors was established when the Department of Water Affairs received representation on the Advisory Council for Physical Planning which was established to undertake the general planning of development. I shall consider the desirability of establishing a special standing committee.

As far as the last recommendation is concerned, the Commission recommends that greater emphasis be placed on research—and now we are coming to the major argument this afternoon—but particularly on better incorporation of the latest knowledge and the coordination of research efforts. For that reason the Commission recommends that the Scientific Advisory Council of the Prime Minister should establish a co-ordinating committee for water research to co-ordinate all the research interests in South Africa. After careful consideration I have decided not to accept this recommendation. I am in fact well aware of the need for co-ordination in the sphere of water research by various bodies. This concerns particularly the research which is being done by the National Institute for Water Research at the C.S.I.R. and by the Department of Water Affairs. That is why I shall recommend to the Government that a Water Research Commission be appointed on which various interested bodies will be represented and which will co-ordinate and look after the research side. I shall subsequently make a further announcement on this matter. Hon. members must however be thoroughly aware of the fact that there is co-ordination of research in general by the Scientific Advisory Council of the Prime Minister. The Department of Water Affairs is incorporated in this co-ordination. Possibly, specific water research in depth will be able to take place under the guidance of a Water Research Commission. I regard this commission, which will also have to consider how it is going to obtain its funds, as probably being the kind of body we will need. That is why I will in due course go to the Government with the necessary proposals. I can just inform the Committee that as far as the idea is concerned, discussions have already been held between the Department of Water Affairs and the C.S.I.R., and that we are in agreement on the question of greater coordination. In fact, both bodies are interested in research being undertaken on a larger scale.

This is what the Commission recommended, and I am pleased that I have been able to inform the Committee which of the recommendations I am able to accept, and which I am unable to accept. I also want to say on this occasion that a large number of the recommendations relate to matters in regard to which the Department has already held identical opinions for a very long time. As hon. members will know, a great many of these recommendations are already in the process of being implemented by the Department of Water Affairs. I am thinking, for example, of research. Research is being undertaken by various bodies and in the past we have endeavoured to achieve greater co-ordination. Considerable results have been achieved as a result of this research. I am also thinking of improved planning. This Committee is well informed enough to know that the Department of Water Affairs has in fact during the past few years allowed emphasis to be placed on planning, and that this aspect has assumed a special position among its activities. Precisely as a result of the greater amount of planning which is being done, we are now able to have a Budget of more than R100 million on the Loan Vote and this amount which has more than doubled in three years’ time is still being spent by almost the same people with greater efficiency. This can only happen if there is good planning. So I can continue to indicate to hon. members that a great deal has in fact been done to give effect to the wishes of the Commission. I just want to say on this occasion that I think that the engineers and the scientists of South Africa, and specifically the engineers of the Department of Water Affairs, and the hydrologists, together with the scientists of the C.S.I.R. are competent and capable of carrying out this programme, and that it is going to take time to supplement their own numbers, but that I think that they have already laid the foundations and that it is already within their ability to carry out what this Commission wants carried out.

I think I would be neglecting my duty if I did not also say that in carrying out the recommendations of this important report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Matters, a great obligation is also being imposed on the country as a whole. On the one hand it is in fact true that there is a Department which has been given instructions to carry out, but on the other hand there are a large number of people who are affected by this.

I want to express the hope that everybody who is going to be affected by this will cooperate. We do not have much water and we can, all of us together, make a success of this project if all of us realize this and co-operate with one another. This applies to the industries, our farmers, to the ordinary consumers in their homes, and in fact to every person in this country.

Mr. Chairman, allow me now to reply to a second question which was put by the hon. member for Piketberg. He said that this Commission mentioned variable draft, which was regarded as an important innovation of the Department regarding its water control. The hon. member then asked me what this meant and whether I would explain it. I shall gladly explain it, and reply in fact at the same time to the hon. member for South Coast who made a point in this regard on Friday afternoon on the control he would like to see in the high berg areas. He called it the “grid system”. As far as the principle of variable draft is concerned therefore, I want to inform hon. members that we in the Department of Water Affairs, have made a great deal of progress in our thinking on this matter, and that we are in fact controlling and managing various rivers in South Africa according to this principle.

But, Sir, with your permission I am going to take one of the most important rivers, the Vaal River, and explain to the Committee how this principle works in the case of the Vaal River. The Vaal River, as the most centrally situated, large, developed river of South Africa, is a river which could normally be regarded as already being over-drawn as far as its resources are concerned. The assured yield of the Vaal Dam is 621 million gallons of water per day. This it can yield year in and year out. With the development of the Vaal River a dam has now been constructed at Bloemhof. When this dam was completed, the assured yield of the river was increased from 621 million gallons per day to 884 million gallons. But now the demand is going to increase over the next ten years. Between 1981-1983 the demand on the Vaal River is not going to be the assured yield of the Vaal Dam and the dam at Bloemhof, but 1,064 million gallons per day, as against the joint present assured yield of 884 million gallons per day. Now there is the question of how one can obtain the maximum from a river if one applies the principle of variable draft. We begin at the bottom. Once the Bloemhof Dam, together with the Vaal Harts Barrage is full— remember it must be full before one can begin to work with it; while it is empty it is not a factor—and it can then be utilized in the system of management, the Bloemhof Dam will have an assured yield of 263 million gallons per day. But in the year 1981-’82 the Bloemhof Dam in the region of Bloemhof and below, i.e. down to the confluence, will also have a demand, or a claim to a yield, not of 263 million gallons, but of 400 million. If we are going to manage the dam and only withdraw from it the 263 million which is its assured yield, it means that there will always have to be a reserve for the future. In other words, the level can never drop. It must be managed in such a way that there is a reserve. But it is our intention not to allow any reserve. We are going to abstract water to its maximum yield. We cannot draw off 400 million gallons per day. Its assured yield is 263 million. We are therefore going to draw off between 340 and 345 million gallons. This means that it is going to be depleted in long periods of drought for 29 per cent of the time. This 29 per cent of the time it can remain depleted will be as long as 15 months. The shortage which is going to arise in those 15 months, will be a shortage of 248,000 morgen feet. In other words, that is going to be the shortage. To control this shortage will mean that it will have to be compensated from the upper dam, namely Vaal Dam. Vaal Dam’s assured yield is 621 million gallons per day. But the demand from Vaal Dam in the next 10 to 12 years is going to increase by 160 million gallons per day. It can therefore yield on an assured basis of 621 million gallons per day. If this is going to increase by an additional 160 million, taking into account the demand of 248,000 morgen feet which it will also have to provide, we can understand that the maximum which the Vaal Dam can yield is going to be completely exceeded. Then, 164 million gallons will be required from it This will mean that the Vaal Dam will not have any reserve either. A dam is never depleted. Because you do not know what can happen to-morrow, one always keeps back a reserve. Below we have drawn off the entire reserve and we are drawing from the river 85 million gallons per day. This water, which we would otherwise not have had, is being taken from the river. But then we are depleting this as well. All that remains then is the annual yield of the Vaal River.

But say, for the sake of argument, that we have had a very bad year. What could the annual yield in respect of the worst year in our history be? It could be what it was in 1933 when the yield for that year was 160 million gallons. In other words, if we deplete and the inflow is only 160 million gallons per year while the demand is 1,064 million gallons, there will be a catastrophe. But now we are depleting it. We are not keeping that reserve which is carried over from year to year and which evaporates. We are distributing it. Then the yield capacity of the river will be so much greater. But then we have a shortage. We can now also move the second point up to a higher point, but in that respect there must be absolute certainty.

That is why we are now harnessing the water from the Tugela. The advantage of doing it in this way is twofold. The large amount of evaporation of stored water, which in South Africa is approximately an average of 27 per cent, is to a large extent being eliminated. The reason for this is that the exposed surface area is diminished, with the result that less evaporation takes place. In the second place I must point out that if the dams are depleted and there should be a flood, we would be able to keep back a large portion of the water which would normally flow away. In other words, we are creating at the dam the additional ability to hold back more of the flood waters. Therefore we are gaining as well. This means that we must bring the water from another point. That other point is the Tugela. If we utilize the water of the Tugela, one of two things could happen. We can in the first place pump out the water from the Tugela directly over the incline from the Spioenkop Dam, which is at present under construction. That would mean that we would have to pump it in at a rate of 180 million gallons per day. We would have to pump continuously. Because the demand is continually growing, we would have to pump in such a way that the Vaal Dam was always full. That means that in times of floods the water would always spill over. But then, in order to have certainty we would have to pump at a rate of 180 million gallons and that would also mean that we would have to do this at tremendous expense.

In linking up the two systems, the first stage of the variable draft is therefore to abstract from below, according to the principles indicated. We will not pump the water directly. We will pump the water from Spioenkop to another dam, namely the Sterkfontein Dam. This dam is situated at a higher altitude and has the advantage that the evaporation there is considerably less than that of the Vaal River. The dam has a small surface area exposed to evaporation. We will keep the water there. But because we will allow the water level of the Vaal River to drop as far as possible and because consistent provision will not then be made, but will only be made for peak periods, we can have the same effect and it will be possible to give the Vaal area the same certainty by pumping in only 60 million gallons instead of 180 million gallons. But now the amount pumped in will not only be 60 million gallons but in fact a little more. Approximately 72 million gallons will be pumped in to make provision for evaporation, etc. In other words, the principle of variable draft is the linking up of two river systems, the creation of certainty at a point and then the control and management thereof to obtain the maximum from the two systems and to do so by way of manipulation in such a way that the minimum loss through evaporation will be suffered and that the river will be built up to its maximum potential, as here in the case of the Vaal River, by depleting it so that the maximum amount of flood water can be retained. Hon. members will know that people are always complaining that too much water flows away to the sea. If we do this, less water will flow away to the sea.

Now hon. members may perhaps ask at what rate it will be necessary to pump? The rate at which it will be necessary to pump is also consistent throughout, and is in fact a third of the rate. Then the water will only be released in blocks when it becomes necessary to supplement the Vaal River again. A large storage capacity will always be kept available so that the full benefit of flood waters can be enjoyed if it should rain. This pumping in process will be consistent. If we make a calculation of periods of drought, the pumping in will have to take place at a rate which agrees with the quantity which will be necessary to fill it between the two periods of drought.

I also want to reply now to a question which may perhaps be put in regard to the further development of the Nuwejaarspruit. The Sterkfontein Dam, to which I referred, has certain advantages over the Vaal Dam. Evaporation of water from this dam is 15 to 20 per cent less. If this dam has the same capacity as the Vaal Dam, the exposed surface area would have been a third of that of the Vaal Dam. In other words, if the exposed surface area is a third of the exposed surface area of the Vaal Dam, even though its capacity is 20 per cent less, it will nevertheless result in a gain of approximately one-quarter as against a full quantity. In addition the Nuwejaarspruit is also situated high up on the slopes of the mountain, and it is deep. It will not cost a great deal to pump this basin out. The pipeline to this spruit will be a short one. The water will not flow as far as Spioenkop, but will be diverted right at the top. It will then be allowed to flow back through a canal to the escarpment. Then it will simply be pumped over.

In other words, pumping costs per unit will also decrease. A further advantage is that it will be easily possible to enlarge it. It will also be easily possible to increase it. In addition it will be able to take any developments. If, for example, an agreement is reached to obtain water from Lesotho, provided it suits both countries and we want this water, we will already have a storage basin where we can store that water easily and cheaply. In all respects, it holds advantages for us. Nor will this dam need to have an outlet, because the area has a small run-off with a tremendously large dam basin. This will be the largest dam without an outlet in the entire world. This makes a big difference because it will not be necessary to build expensive outlet structures. This scheme will in any case be R3 million cheaper than the other scheme which was first envisaged before we, after intensive investigation, decided to abandon the scheme at Java. This is another example of the benefits which good planning and time in which to plan holds. Then one can always improve, as it was possible for us to improve in this case, on a submission already before this House. I hope that in future we will also find it possible to spend much more time on the planning of these major schemes. Then one will be able to have these gains and savings.

I just want to say to the hon. member for South Coast that since we are doing it in this way, it is in my opinion the correct planning, and is preferable to, as he calls it, the “berg system” because there are not always catchment basins in the high bergs and the topography is not always such that water can be beneficially used. What must be done is to store water at as high an altitude as possible through means of good planning. As far as that is concerned, I agree with the hon. member. In fact, we are already doing so. The Theewaterkloof Dam is an example of the creation of a dam basin at the very top, for good distribution. There are others, too. Therefore as far as this matter is concerned, I agree with the hon. member. But I nevertheless think it is safer to speak of the principle of variable draft rather than the other, because it has been well formulated on a scientific basis and within the planning concept. An area in which this concept can be applied, is the Boland. The area here entails that various dams will have to be built and linked up. I trust that we will be able to make the same secure calculation here as is to-day the case with the Vaal River.

The commission in its report is in fact giving the necessary attention to research.

†in regard to pollution, I agree with the hon. member for South Coast that this has become a very great problem in South Africa and the rest of the world. But no factory in this country is allowed to abstract any water from any stream without a permit. By the same token, nobody can discharge any effluent into streams without complying with the general standards laid down by the Bureau of Standards. We can clamp down on anyone who does not comply with these standards. But it is nevertheless becoming a vexed problem. In regard to the Mondi problem, may I state that the Mondi people have been with me a while ago. They do not intend proceeding with a factory there. I stated last year that I intended allowing no pollution there. However, I do not want to discuss this matter now; I only want to point out that they are not proceeding with the factory. Had they decided to proceed with the factory we would not have allowed them to pollute the Umzimkulu River.

*The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet referred to the Van Ryneveld Pass Dam and mentioned the Wapadsberg tunnel. Such a tunnel will be 32 miles long and will be very expensive. The construction of a tunnel does not form part of the development yet; it does not fall within the first phase. Without wanting to be pessimistic I must say that the costs of such a tunnel could be prohibitive. As I have said, it will be extremely expensive to build. But after we have calculated the cost, taking into account the prescriptions contained in the report of the commission, we will be able to decide whether we can afford it and whether it will be in the best interests of the country to build that tunnel. I hope the hon. member is not disappointed. But he will understand that we will have to make a great deal of progress towards the completion of the first phase before we can proceed to create new possibilities under phases two and three.

You will not forget to reply to the question about St. Lucia?

In view of the fact that there may be more arguments in regard to this matter, I shall not reply to that now, but shall allow it to stand over for a subsequent occasion.

I hope hon. members will agree with me that the submission of this report was a great occasion for us in South Africa. We will now be able to continue developing, in the full knowledge of what guiding lines we must pursue in order to control our water resources in South Africa properly.

This report on water matters, which has already been referred to, is a very important one and should have been published long ago. But it is a good thing that it has come at a time when we have a Minister who can concentrate on water affairs. Because his own constituency knows drought and water needs, he fully appreciates these problems. He dealt with the importance of this report in such a way that we obtained an even deeper insight into this important matter. We are grateful for that, as well as for the fact that he summarized the most important aspects of the report in such a simple way. It made it so much easier for us to grasp them properly.

When water was discussed in the past, it was always regarded as something applicable to farming, as something in which only farmers were interested and which did not affect the other sections of our society. But as far back as 1903, the Rand Water Board was established by statute in order to provide water for the Witwatersrand complex and its mines, industries and residential areas. It was accepted that the State had to provide water for settlements and for irrigation purposes. But times have changed, and together with this, the needs have increased. Because of this, it has become necessary to-day for the State to control all our water. I acknowledge that the Rand Water Board has done good work and has accomplished much. In fact, this is still the position to-day. But the extent of the problem has increased tremendously in the meanwhile. The commission expressed it in this way in its report—

Therefore it is essential that there should be central control, such as we now have in the Department of Water Affairs. Only in that way can we exercise proper control.

I have looked up the figures and have found that when this Government came into power in 1948, a small amount of R4 million was made available for Water Affairs from loan funds, and this year the Minister of Finance was able to announce that more than R100 million had been made available for this purpose. I believe that this shows far-sightedness; it is an indication that the Government is fully aware of what the needs are going to be in the future. It is also an indication of our belief that we must and shall grow. Therefore provision is being made for funds to be made available on such a scale that we can grow.

I believe that the Department of Water Affairs will have to be extended and will have to grow into one of our most important Departments, because if we do not have water, Sir, we shall perish. Without it we shall not be able to survive, no matter how much money and other assets we may have. If we do not have water, we simply cannot live. We are grateful to the Minister for the way in which he has impressed the importance of water on the minds of the public in this Water Year. We are grateful for what the Minister has done in order to stimulate the public’s interest. In this respect he has attained tremendous success, and we want to thank him and his staff very much for the great work which they have done. Now all of us have at least become water conscious. It is no longer only the farmers who are water conscious, but all sectors of society.

I want to hurry, because my time is running out. I should like to say something about my constituency. In Waterberg we have the mountains, but not the water; the water is still on the Estimates. Of the 13,108 square miles of my constituency at least 7,500 square miles consist of mountains, namely the Waterberg range. In mentioning these figures, I am keeping as closely as possible to the estimated figures of the Department of Water Affairs. I estimate the extent of the mountain ranges at 7,500 square miles; the Department estimated it at 7,450 square miles. Therefore there is very little difference between the two figures. Sir, it is calculated that an average of 25 inches of rain per year falls in that mountain area. I think this is rather high, but it is the Department’s figure and I accept it. This 25 inches of rain, which falls only in the mountainous area, yields 4,887,500 morgen feet of water. This is a tremendous quantity of water; it is such a large quantity that one can hardly comprehend its volume. If we accept that 90 per cent of this water soaks into the earth or evaporates, and that there is a runoff of 10 per cent, 488,000 morgen feet of water flows away and is lost. Sir, from those mountainous areas the water flows away in four rivers. On the western boundary of my constituency we have the Matlabas; on the eastern boundary we have, firstly, the Nile River, which later becomes the Magalakwin River, and between them lies the Maqol and the Palala Rivers. All the water from the mountains flows along those rivers in a northerly direction towards the Limpopo and then joins the Limpopo. That quantity of water which flows down to the Limpopo must be conserved, and this year the Minister has granted approval for the building of a dam. [Time expired.]

We are grateful for the explanation the hon. the Minister has given us in regard to this report. It has been four years in coming, but I am not complaining about that. There is a tremendous amount of very valuable information here and by and large, may I say to the Minister, the thinking of the commission was along the lines and the principle we have been laying down from this side of the House for the last five or six years. We like to think that many of the details here fit in very closely with the principles we have laid down. There are one or two points I should like to make now immediately following after the Minister. The first is that we may have records of rainfall and of river flow, etc., but we do not have any graph to indicate to us what the industrial development of South Africa will be in the next two or three decades. In other words, we cannot see what the consumption of water is going to be for industrial purposes in the course of the next 20 or 30 years. So that while we can see the water that is here, such as it is—whether it is polluted or not, I leave aside for the moment— we cannot see what we are going to need in future. We have ourselves from time to time pointed out that if you start a new development such as the new harbour at Richard’s Bay we have no idea of how big the urban area will develop around Richard’s Bay and the sheer physical volume of water which will be required there. If we strike oil at a few points in South Africa, who can tell what industrial development will take place in those areas: It may be in semi-arid or arid areas where there is no water at present and water will have to be made available for that purpose. This is the big question-mark which hangs over us. So already now we feel not only that we have to deal with the question of stopping pollution— not purifying water; cycling and re-using water is good, but we have to stop the pollution and that is why we lay the emphasis on this question of enforcement of the necessary agencies. But when you move from that, where do we get to? We get to the point that I made on Friday, and that is our shortage of manpower, the scientist and the professional man. Those people should be brought here and put under the Secretary for Water Affairs and they should be authorized to go ahead with all that research which has been recommended here and which can be carried out in terms of the programme which the Department of Water Affairs is mapping out for itself. But the shortage of manpower and our inability to say what industrial development will take place are going in their own way to be just as limiting factors as the actual physical shortage of water itself.

I now want to come to this question of water. Last year I said that it seemed to me that when you try and read the very inadequate signs, here in the Southern Hemisphere we are passing through a period at the lowest point of an interfluvial period, and that is why we get the kind of weather we get like we had at East London the other day. We have big droughts and then a sudden terrific precipitation of rain in certain areas, here and there. What we have to realize is that we are looking at all these natural phenomena from too close up. We look at it in terms of our own lifetime. A lot of people think that our droughts with their effect like the desiccation of the soil are due to man. It is true that man is one of the agents responsible, but it is not only due to man. It is not only due to the amount of the precipitation; it is due to the way the precipitation takes place. You can get 42 inches at a time, as they had the other day in East London, but to say that that 42 inches is equal to 42 inches spread over the whole of 12 months is nonsense. 42 inches over a whole year would be wonderful for East London, but look what damage 42 inches can do in three days time. Just think what would happen if 42 inches were to fall somewhere in the platteland. What troubles would we not have been in if 42 inches of rain had fallen within three days in one of the basins of one of our rivers in the platteland? This has happened before. A very much lesser precipitation, something like 18 inches, has fallen in East Griqualand and the Natal Coast in 1956. Look at the trouble that was caused by that precipitation, which was only but half the precipitation we have had at East London.

Look at it from the other side. Look at droughts. The biggest drought we have ever had in that part of the country was in about 1810-1812. Even to this day the Zulu people call this year the Myedlatula. That was the year when, if a person found a bit of fruit, he would have eaten it quietly by himself without saving a word to anybody else, which is completely contrary to the Zulu custom. The custom is that if you have one banana amongst four people, the banana will be divided in four pieces amongst themselves. This was the year of Myedlatula, and they even speak of it to this day. That was before the white man came to that part of the world, namely in 1810. Then the water supplies dried up and the Tugela River was merely a series of pools. I, in my lifetime, have seen the Tugela dry up in the upper part at the National Park. We get these droughts and then again we get these heavy precipitations and this has become part of the way we have to live in South Africa.

When we are dealing with the question of water, not only do we want to know the natural laws which are affecting our underground water supplies, and not only do we want to know the best measures which can be taken to prevent pollution of the water that we have got, but we also have to provide new water. That we have to get from the sea. My friend, the hon. member for Mooi River, is quite right when he says “what is the price of water to a man who has no water in the middle of the Sahara”. He will pay anything for it. The time comes when we in South Africa will have to face the cost. In this report, namely in para. 7 of the terms of reference the question of the utilization of atomic power stations is mentioned and in para. 8 the possibility of desalination of seawater in general is mentioned and also the possibility of using atomic energy for the desalination project. Atomic energy plants should be at the coast. The seawater there should be the subject of the research with the Atomic Energy Commission plants which should all be at the sea coast. As I have said on Friday, we have Commission plants which should all be at the sea coast. As I have said on Friday, we have to remember that we are going to have a new power plant which will ignore the internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine to-day is an anachronism and it should be put in a museum. It is only the amounts of capital invested in the factories producing internal combustion engines which keep it on the streets to-day. If you can put a bridle on atomic energy you will have a new plant which will pump water at probably a fraction of the cost of what it is costing us to-day. When we can produce the right scientific approach to the harnessing of power for the purpose of desalination, we can only say that we are at the A or the B of the ABC in the development of this nature at the present time. I submit that these are the things on which we should be spending our money, because at this stage we have the money, but it is coming from an asset which is diminishing. It should provide for something which will last for ever, and that is the future supply, the guaranteed supply, of new water. This will be essential for South Africa if it wants to progress into the future, as it ought to do. This should be done if it takes 10, 20 or 30 years for the professional people and the scientists to get the answer to these problems which are facing us at the present time. Purification, saving, dams, preventing evaporation, and the whole lot will not provide the future South Africa with the necessary water if our nation is to increase and develop as it ought to and if it wants to continue to keep in step with the rest of the world in regard to all those activities which are part of our Western civilization. We cannot stop in 10, 20, 30 or 40 years; we must keep up and our population must keep going. If there is no water, there is no population. Therefore if you limit your water, you limit your population. This is what we have to face and this is the stark truth. We have to go down to the coast and we have to develop our atomic energy plants on which we have to build the future of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, when one looks at the report of the Department of Water Affairs, one finds that it contains interesting reading matter, particularly in regard to expenditure and the number of engineering posts that have been filled. When one considers these matters, one can only express the greatest appreciation towards and congratulate the hon. the Minister, Mr. Kriel, the Secretary, and the technical staff of that Department. In 1953 an amount of R144,000 was spent per engineer employed. In 1969 an amount of almost R600,000 per engineer employed was spent by this Department. I do not think one can allow this fact to pass without comment. We have a department here which is literally coping with the manpower shortage magnificently. This is being done in such a way that it makes me shudder to think of the enormous amount of money they are going to spend once all the posts in their establishment are filled. I do not know where we are then going to get all the money from. I think the department deserves the gratitude of this Committee and of the whole of South Africa for the extraordinary services it renders as well as for the extraordinary way in which these services are being rendered.

There is one other minor matter I should like to refer to. In this Water Year, the opening in the wall of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam was finally closed a fortnight ago. One can really look forward with a smile to the day when the first rains will come, when the streams will come rushing down from the mountains and when the Orange River will be in flood in its full splendour and will suddenly come up against the magnificent structure of the enormous Hendrik Verwoerd Dam. I think I am going to send the Minister a telegram that day asking him to visit me. He has seen to it that there will be enough water for mixing purposes and I will see to the rest. It will be a day of rejoicing for us once the Orange River is really harnessed and when the first water will be flowing down the canals for the benefit of the community and the welfare of South Africa. Furthermore, we are looking forward to the day when a start will be made with the P. M. K. le Roux Dam and to the day when the canals will be running out into the country along the northern and the southern bank. I shall appreciate it if the Minister can tell us at this stage when a start will be made with the P. M. K. le Roux Dam and what progress has been made in regard to the construction of the canals which are going to lead from this dam. I wonder whether it is not possible to tell the farmers in that area as soon as possible in which direction these canals and particularly the larger ones are going to run. One can appreciate that those farmers are living on hope while the position of others is most uncertain because they are not sure what is going to become of them, where the water is going to be taken to and for precisely what purpose the water is going to be used. I shall appreciate it if the hon. the Minister will make a statement in this regard if it is in any way possible for him to do so.

Then there is another minor matter I should like to deal with. This concerns the Water Year. When the Minister makes a speech in which he mentions the bottlenecks in the provision of water and if he states in the course of his speech that the maximum water storage potential will be reached at a particular place by the year 1980 and that we will be faced with problems as from that day, it is announced by the newspapers that the Minister has said that 1980 is the year in which that particular place will be ruined. If there is sufficient water, there are no problems. If the Minister sees fit to control the water in the Vaal or the Orange River so that no more water can be pumped from these rivers, they say “Water in Orange River now finally controlled”, and they publish a photograph of the Minister with the report. What amuses me, is where the newspapers get all these nice photographs of the Minister depicting him with a smile on his face every time he has to impose drought measures. I was somewhat concerned about this, in regard to our Water Year, the publicity of which went off particularly smoothly, that these are the points our newspapers are so fond of harping on. I was concerned about this, because I think that overseas and local industrialists, as a result of these impressions which are being created, may be frightened away because they may think that South Africa has a water shortage which cannot be augmented. They do not emphasize the important fact of the research work which is being carried out in regard to evaporation and subterranean water as well as the fact that, owing to the good offices of the Department and particularly under the guidance of the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs, the University of Pretoria has already established a faculty dealing with the techniques of the exploitation of subterranean water. It is rather the sensational news items which are emphasized. When it comes to water, it is not the sensational which is going to ensure our future. This will only be brought about through hard work and well-considered planning. I am particularly interested in the faculty established for the exploitation of subterranean water, because I think there are few matters in South Africa in respect of which so many mistakes are made as the exploitation of subterranean water. When compiling his so-called dictionary, Langenhoven, in defining the word “aar” (subterranean water course), stated: “Dis ’n stroom water onder die grond wat ’n mens gewoonlik misboor” (It is a subterranean water course which, when drilling for it, one misses). In my part of the world we had an elderly friend who was a water diviner. He used to walk around with a magneto on his head. When crossing a subterranean water course, he staggered first this way and then the other. If the subterranean water course was sufficiently strong, he used to fall to the ground. But when it came to drilling for water, he usually drilled at the wrong place. No emphasis is laid on the basic research work which is essential for the exploitation of our water resources in the future. I want to ask that our Press should give the same prominence to that basic work as it gives sensational news items. [Time expired.]

I will not follow the hon. member for Fauresmith with his “misboor” but I do want to comment on the Water Year to say that we in our area of the Midmar Dam, are very pleased indeed to be playing host to the hon. the Minister and the hon. the Prime Minister when they come there, which I believe is on the 5th November for a function to draw attention to the Water Year. I do want to just remind the hon. the Prime Minister and the Minister that, when they come there, they are in Sutton country. I want them to bear that in mind.

I want to speak about the fourth principle of the United Party policy, namely that of apportionment, which I want to mention in particular with reference to the Mooi River in Natal. At the water symposium held in Durban earlier on this year, which the hon. the Minister attended, the City of Durban through the town engineer laid claim to the waters of the Mooi River for Durban’s future use. The hon. the Minister was on record as saying last year that by the year 1985 the Umgeni River would be developed to its absolute full capacity, and would include dams at Midmar, at Albert Falls, at the Gorge, the present Nagle Dam and at the Inanda site. It is a sobering thought to think that by 1985 with all the work done in the Umgeni River, the water potential for Durban will have been exhausted. I repeat what I have said before, namely that this is the most important river in Natal, because virtually over half the population of Natal is dependent on this river for its water supply. The point I raise about the Mooi River is that the City of Durban has claimed that this water should be made available to them for their future use by means of a tunnel underneath the Karkloof range which would deliver the waters of the Mooi River into the Karkloof River for storage in the Albert Falls Dam. While I deal with the Albert Falls Dam, I would be grateful if the hon. the Minister could tell us when the programme which he envisages for the starting of this dam is to be commenced. Both I and the people in that area are extremely interested to know when work will commence. I should like to draw to the Minister’s attention a report that was issued by the Town and Regional Planning Commission in Natal, which was drawn up by Dr. Matthews of the University of Natal, which envisaged the harnessing of the Mooi River, the surplus water in the Bushman’s River, the Little Bushman’s River and the Little Tugela to deliver into the Spioenkop Dam an additional amount of 80 million gallons a day. The hon. the Minister has been talking about the assured draught for the Vaal River with the water coming from the Tugela River. Now, a plan has been drawn up by Dr. Matthews to deliver, by means of canals and pipelines, a further amount of 80 million gallons a day into the site of the Spioenkop Dam where the Department of Water Affairs are building to-day a dam to hold water for delivery over the Berg. The point is that, by means of the canals and pipelines, it is possible because of the fall in the gradient of the river to generate power while transferring the water from the catchment of the Mooi River into the Tugela River. One of the most interesting aspects of this is that, as one starts from the headwaters of the Tugela River, going towards the sea, the level at which the rivers flow into the Tugela River, the general height of those streams, rises as one goes towards the sea. This is a most unusual geological feature. I do not think it has happened anywhere else before. It seems to be the result of a unique geological formation. From the Mooi River which is far closer to the sea, water can actually be led back towards the Berg, and in that way water can be extracted and harnessed from the other rivers between the Mooi River itself and the Tugela River, at the same time generating power.

I was interested to hear from the hon. the Minister that they do not now intend to pump water from the Spioenkop Dam itself, but rather from a number of weirs above the site of the Spioenkop Dam. I think that it is correct that the Minister now intends taking water off closer to the Berg by means of a canal, so that there is merely that small area to pump over the berg, rather than the long reach from the Spioenkop Dam. I presume that provision will be made for pumping from Spioenkop Dam itself up to the weir, if that should prove necessary, because I am quite certain that they cannot rely on the supply of water at that particular place.

In the report of Dr. Matthews is a chance to make an additional amount of water available to the Spioenkop Dam together with power which is generated merely in the course of passing water from one area to the next. It did occur to me that one has innumerable opportunities here specifically in regard to water, should it not be required to go over the berg, for irrigation purposes. Power will be available and, as I say, it is free power. It is simply made available by reason of the structures which are required to pass the water from the one area to the other. Surely it would be possible to utilize that power to pump water even, if necessary, into the Bantu areas in order to make by irrigation some possibility of the rehabilitation of some of those areas. In this way we will make a real positive contribution to agricultural production. I would be interested to know the hon. the Minister’s reaction to the report of Dr. Matthews because, as I say, it comes again to the policy of apportionment. The Mooi River is to-day becoming a source not really of controversy, but certainly it has been claimed by the city of Durban whereas there is to-day an alternative use of that water which is being proposed. I think this could be very usefully employed.

I should like to know whether there are other areas that the hon. the Minister has in mind because he has to assure the city of Durban of their future water supply. That is the point about our principle of apportionment. Our first principle is to assure every existing community of their water supply. To be able to do that, we will have to plan, as the hon. the Minister indicates he intends to do, the use of water which is available and direct it into certain channels so that in a certain area the water will come from a certain source and in another area the water will come from another source. I would be interested to know how the Minister sees the waters of the Mooi River and what its future will be. While I am dealing with the question of the Spioenkop Dam, I would like to ask the hon. the Minister when he envisages the matter of expropriation of the farmers concerned will be completed. I have been a number of times in that area and from what I have heard, the matter has not yet been finalized. Although the dam wall seems to be rising quite satisfactorily and the people in the camp are very busy, the farmers themselves have not yet reached any conclusion with the Department. This is something I would like the hon. the Minister to give his attention to because this has been under way for quite a while and there seems to be no satisfactory conclusion.

I would like to come back to the matter which I raised some years ago concerning the proclamation of the Nyamvubu and the Karkloof control areas. When the hon. the Minister introduced the Mountain Catchment Control Bill I was under the impression that the powers under that Bill would be used in order to control afforestation in those areas. However, I was interested to see in the report of the Department that these areas were controlled by the Department of Water Affairs and that regulations will be issued by the Department of Water Affairs for the control of those areas, and specifically in relation to afforestation. The hon. the Minister, when he replied to the debate on the other Bill, gave no indication that this was in fact the case. I would be interested to know whether this hon. Minister, as Minister of Water Affairs, will take the steps which are necessary to make his proclamation effective or whether he will do it as Minister of Forestry? As I see it, he has powers in terms of both the Bill which was recently passed through this House and in terms of the Water Act which he invoked at the time when he proclaimed those areas as catchment control areas. I would be very interested indeed to know exactly how he proposes to handle it and what steps he will take. I should also like to know when it is intended that some sort of action should be taken in this regard?

Mr. Chairman, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity, in the first place, to refer to the Clanwilliarn dam in my own constituency. Having dealt with that, I want to raise a few points in regard to water affairs in general in the Boland. I want to avail myself of this opportunity to thank the Minister and his Department and to express our appreciation on behalf of the irrigation area Clanwilliam/Vredendal/Lutzville/Koekenaap which has an interest in the storage dam at Clanwilliam and in the irrigation potentialities of the Orange River. The raising of the dam wall at Clanwilliam has been completed in the course of this year, and the dam is overflowing at the moment—in the first year after the completion of the dam wall. At one stage this dam was the only one in the country which was full. We want to express our appreciation for the work which has been carried out by the State at that dam and as a result of which the capacity of the dam was increased from approximately 26,000 morgen feet to 47,000 morgen feet of water, which for the most part has been allocated for agricultural purposes. As such this gives a fresh stability, a fresh optimism and hope to the farming community in that area. For that reason I want to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation on behalf of that community. At this stage I should like to refer to the comments of the Commission, comments in regard to water for agriculture purposes in general. The following is stated by the Commission on page 2—

This has a bearing particularly on the Western Cape area, an area which has contributed substantially over the past years to earning foreign exchange for our country by way of exporting deciduous fruits, citrus, wine and other products. I want to make the point that, to my mind, not enough attention has been given in the past to the provision and conservation of water for agricultural purposes in the Western Cape. Until quite recently we really had only one State dam, i.e. the Clanwilliam Dam, in that area. I think the farmers in that area have shown that a very good case can be made out for the provision of water for agricultural purposes and that, considered on a long-term basis, the State can expect a handsome dividend on an investment of this nature. There is a measure of anxiety and concern among many people in the Boland that this quotation from the report of the Commission may be interpreted incorrectly and that it may persuade the Department to be over-cautious in making water available for agriculture purposes in the Western Cape. I trust—and I should like to hear what the standpoint of the Minister is in this regard—that the Department will continue to include in its planning this very part of our country, which is situated in the gateway to our export markets. Water is such a vital factor in the production of quality products—I emphasize: water provision, supplementary irrigation which is mentioned here, is a very important factor in the production of quality products, products which will be able to compete on the world markets. For that reason I trust that the Minister and his Department will, in their planning, give due attention to this particular need. In this respect I have in mind particularly the Orange River, the Berg River and the Bree River. I addressed a meeting in the vicinity of Robertson a few years ago. On that occasion a number of farmers approached me and told me that they found it interesting to listen to what I had to say in regard to the provision and conservation of water in the Boland. They told me that they were regarded as prominent farmers in that area, but that they would go bankrupt if water were not made available. There are many farmers in the Western Cape who are dependent on State assistance to-day and who have to be assisted from time to time to cope with the periods of drought. In times of crisis there is no water available to them. For that reason they do not have the necessary continuity in their farming and they cannot produce products of a quality they would like to produce and which they are in a position to produce if only there is water available to them. The thought I want to emphasize is that the Department should ensure a sufficient water supply for the Boland in the catchment areas of the Olifants, Berg and Bree Rivers. There are few other opportunities for expansion in that area and for that reason particular attention should be given to this matter. As a matter of fact, this matter should be given priority. We have no objection if water is taken from these rivers and supplied to the areas of the Cape Peninsula. We impress it upon our people that they should have a broad approach. We have old-established farming communities in that area and we want to develop these water resources for both the farming community and the Cape Peninsula and its needs. In view of Citrusdal and its needs, what I envisage is another dam in the upper reaches of the Olifants River and the provision of water to the Porterville/Piketberg areas from the Twenty-four Rivers. Progress has already been made with the planning of a storage dam in the Wolseley/Ceres mountains, in the White River and other areas. It will definitely be quite expensive to build dams in these mountain gorges, but they will not only make available a sufficient supply of water, but they will also, in due course, serve as pleasant recreational resorts and fishing spots, and so forth, for our urban population. We shall appreciate it if the Department will give its serious attention to this matter. This is one of the fine developments which can still be carried out with a view to stabilizing and expanding agriculture and specific agricultural industries in the light of this report. At the same time it will mean that the Peninsula will be assured of a sufficient supply of water for many years to come. Our farming community as well as our towns and our cities are looking forward to this, and I trust that, where the hon. the Minister is now seriously and expeditiously engaged in establishing certain waterworks in the Boland, he will not stop at one or two schemes, but that this task will be carried out uninterruptedly until this urgent need has been provided for.

Sir, the hon. member for Piketberg will excuse me if I do not follow him, because he has specifically dealt with his own constituency, I want to confine myself to the first and final policy statement made by the hon. member for South Coast, and that is an assured water supply to existing communities and the making available of funds for research in regard to the re-use of water. I want to point out to the hon. the Minister that these two principles should he closely linked with the supply of water to the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal complex. It is a well-known fact that this area is mainly dependent upon the Vaal basin for its water supply and is, after all. responsible for 45 per cent of the industrial provision of South Africa. The first policy statement from this side of the House, namely an assured water supply to existing communities, is of vital importance to this area. Sir, the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal Triangle has already burst its seams and will completely net out of hand if the Government does not drastically improve its planning in the near future. In this regard I want to refer specifically to the ideological basis of development in the Rosslyn-Brits area, which will be mainly dependent upon the Vaal for its water supplies. Sir, the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal Triangle, as it exists at present, and as it is going to expand even further, wants to be assured that it is not going to suffer from a lack of water. I am talking about the existing industries which are going to expand. I believe that the hon. the Minister should give his serious attention to relieve the enormous demand for the provision of water from the Vaal basin.

The assured water supplies, as has been mentioned again by the hon. the Minister this afternoon, is 621 million gallons per day, but it is also said that the demand will increase to more than 2,000 million gallons per day towards the year 2000. This is an increase of more than 300 per cent. The Minister has elaborated on this a moment ago, and the problem we will have to face in future is definitely not an easy one. Sir, knowing the climatic conditions in this country as we do, I believe that we will have to take precautionary measures to see to it that we will not be overcome by future water shortages in this country. Water restrictions have again been announced by the hon. the Minister. I want to recommend most strongly to the hon. the Minister that he should give serious consideration to the insurance scheme proposed by the chairman of the Executive Committee of the Johannesburg Municipality. The Vaalhartz agricultural area fulfils a very important task in providing of food for South Africa, and when the hon. member for Houghton says here that the water should be cut off we realize that all she is doing is to exploit the racial problem for the political gain of her own party. The fact of the matter is, Sir, that this Vaalhartz areas uses 30 per cent of the available water from the Vaal. We know that the production value of the Vaalhartz area amounts to only R5 million per year as against the R2,746 million in respect of the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-vaal area; this includes R2,020 million from industry, R52 million from Escom, R165 million from Iscor, R26 million from Sasol and R483 million from the gold-fields on the Witwatersrand, excluding the Free State goldfields.

This area uses approximately 43 per cent of the available water supply from the Vaal. If water restrictions were therefore to be imposed, the Vaalhartz people would be the hardest hit. In 1966 the water supply in that area was cut by one third in order to make available the Vaalhartz water to the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal area. Those farmers were at that stage compensated by the Government to the extent of approximately R1,000 per farmer. A total amount of R1? million was provided by the Government. The insurance scheme proposed by the Johannesburg Executive Committee, provides that a levy of 1 cent per thousand gallons be imposed on all water consumption in the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal area. Such a levy will, over a period of 5 years, make available an amount of R4.8 million as compensation for the Vaalhartz farmers, which will mean R4,800 per farmer instead of R1,000 per farmer.

I want to admit right away that this suggestion is merely a precautionary measure and that this will not be the answer. When one looks at the graph of the monthly flow of the Vaal River over the period 1923 to 1963, a period of 40 years, it shows enormous high water marks but also dangerous low water marks. This has already become an historical problem. In 1895 Barney Barnato’s Water Works Company claimed that they had available 1.5 million gallons for the demand of 900,000 gallons per day, but it is a well-known fact that the 102,000 Whites, Bantu and Asiatics who were resident on the Witwatersrand at that time, complained that they did not even have enough water to take a bath. A commission of inquiry was appointed and in 1901 Lord Milner did the same, and consequently the Rand Water Board was established. In 1923 it was calculated that 20 million gallons per day from the Barrage in the Vaal River would have provided sufficient water, but 11 years later the supply was inadequate and the Vaal dam was built. At that time it was accepted that 60 million gallons per day would be adequate. In 1954 the then Minister of Lands, the late hon. Mr. Strydom warned that there would be a shortage of 206 million gallons per day by the year 2000. Even at this stage we see that the estimate of what this shortage is going to be was a very optimistic one. In 1961 the Vaal River Catchment Association held a symposium, supported only by the municipalities and the mines, and we know that it took a drought to make commerce and industry water conscious. The Hendrik Verwoerd dam has been anticipated now and on completion this dam will definitely bring relief if the water could be pumped to areas such as Kimberley, Sishen and Prieska, but at this stage, it only means a relief of 63 million gallons per day from the Vaal. On completion the Oppermandsdrift dam will definitely be able to make a tremendous contribution to augment the present supply from the Vaal basin. The 60 million gallons per day from the Tugela will bring relief, but that cannot be the answer, because if future development were to take place in the Tugela basin, this water would no longer be available to the Witwatersrand complex.

There is much Space for the decentralization of industries. There is the Tugtla basin, which I have mentioned a moment ago, and that includes Newcastle, Ladysmith, Pietermaritzburg and Estcourt. There are areas such as East London, Queenstown and King William’s Town, from which it will be much easier to obtain a supply of water than it is from the Vaal basin. This means decentralization of industries. I want to make a serious appeal to the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs that he should warn his colleagues, the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and the hon. the Minister of Planning against developing the Rosslyn-Brits complex and other such areas which are being developed merely for the purpose of pursuing ideological Bantustan ideas.

You are talking nonsense.

The Vaal basin is being overburdened and if the hon. the Minister cannot influence the decentralization of our industries to areas which have water supply potentialities, he will have even more problems and not fewer. An assured water supply to existing communities such as the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal area cannot be guaranteed when areas such as Rosslyn and Brits are being established merely for ideological reasons.

One final thought I want to mention, is the statement made by the hon. member for South Coast to the effect that more funds should be made available for research work concerning the re-use and better utilization of water. In the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal area only 20 per cent of the water is being re-used at present and in this respect there is much scope for research to be carried out, in the first place, concerning the better utilization of water, and in the second place, the re-use of water by industry. The better utilization and the re-use of water by the Vaalhartz agricultural area, where improved irrigation methods can be developed to ensure increased crops with reduced water consumption. I want to conclude, and my plea to the hon. the Minister is that in the decentralization of industries ideological ideas should not be of paramount importance, but that due regard should be had to the provision of water. Secondly, more funds should be made available for research work to be carried out in regard to the better utilization and the re-use of water and, finally, proper precautionary measures should be taken to ensure a supply of water for the Witwatersrand-Pretoria-Vaal area.

Mr. Chairman, in view of the fact that we have been conducting a debate on water for a few hours at the level at which we always conduct such a debate in this House, I regret that I am now obliged to rise as the hon. member who has just resumed his seat kept on speaking of ideological thinking involved in the development of Pretoria. I want to tell him at once that he had better consult the hon. member for South Coast in that regard. Or did the hon. member consult the hon. member for South Coast— Why did the hon. member drag the matter into this debate? I want to know from the hon. member where he comes from to allege that if we use the capital of South Africa for bringing water to the Transvaal from Natal, that is fine for the Rand but not for Pretoria? If that hon. member had listened, he would have known that the attitude We adopt in this regard—and this is more important than what he said—is that the water of South Africa should be used where it is in the economic interests of the country as a whole. If it is in the economic interests of South Africa to keep Pretoria and its envirous going, they will be kept going.

I did not speak of Pretoria; I was speaking of the Rosslyn-Brits area.

The hon. member spoke of the Rosslyn-Brits area. There, after all, we have a homeland, i.e. the homeland of the Tswana. Should we now chase the Tswana over the Drakensberg mountain range so that they may he kept going along the Tugela River? If the hon. member wants to drag in this kind of matter, if he wants to bring in politics, I shall put my book down and fight a political battle. I do not think this is the attitude in which this debate was opened, and if he had consulted the chairman of his group, he would have known that the report of the commission would be under discussion and that we would try to take as objective a view of that as possible. Then there are the so-called five points of principle. As the hon. member spoke of their policy, I should like to know what the policy is which the hon. member called their new policy. What is the so-called new policy? According to them it is the assured supply of water to existing areas —just imagine, this is their policy now. What are we engaged in doing here in South Africa? Why are we supplying water at a rate of 100 million gallons per annum at the moment? We are doing so to develop existing areas. What is the outcome of all the schemes from which that hon. member and others are benefiting? The planning of the Department is not being started now: it started many years ago. Why is this being done? It is being done to keep existing areas going. Now, all of a sudden, it is new policy! It is not new policy, it is common sense we have been using throughout the years. The Department has been engaged in sound planning throughout the years. The construction of many of these large schemes which have been developed, has been completed by the Department, and now, all of a sudden, since the hon. members have gathered round the table to enjoy the fruits of this hard work, it is their new policy.

Let us leave the matter at that and return to the points to which the hon. member referred. We were discussing one important point, i.e. the supply in the high mountain ranges. I dealt with this point before. It concerns the question of storage in the highest areas and the integration of the various water systems for supplying water where the country needs water most. This is the policy of the Government and it is not something which we are announcing now. These are things we have carried into effect and we are spending hundreds and millions of rand on them. This is no new development. Does the hon. member think that the construction of the Theewaterskloof Dam, which we have commenced, is new policy, or has that been started a few years ago? Have the planning and development not been completed? What of the Orange River scheme? An amount of hundreds and millions of rand has been spent on taking water from one area to another, and now, all of a sudden it is new policy! No, there is no need to have any policy as regards the principle of sound planning. It simply remains sound planning. The principle which the Government lays down is a fundamental one, i.e. that water in South Africa should be supplied to and used at places where the economy of the country needs water most. This is the over-riding principle. As this is the accepted principle, we are taking water from Natal to use it at Pretoria, at Rosslyn, at Johannesburg, or wherever it may be needed in South Africa. If it is necessary to do so, we bring water from the Theewaterskloof Dam to Paarl or to Laaiplek, or to wherever South Africa needs it. If it is necessary to do so, we take water we have stored in the Witbank area and use that water at Phalaborwa or wherever South Africa needs that water. This is the over-riding principle we lay down in planning the future of South Africa’s water and in planning South Africa’s water requirements. In planning these requirements, we have regard to the timeous supply of water to places where South Africa needs water. This is the over-riding principle. This is not a principle which we are announcing now, but is one on which the Department has been operating for many years.

†I now want to deal with questions raised by other hon. members. The hon. member for South Coast raised a question in connection with St. Lucia. I know that the hon. member is as interested in the situation at St. Lucia as I am. The hon. member has quite rightly pointed out that there is a short-term and a long-term solution. Unfortunately, as the hon. member knows, it is a very intricate problem. It is a big problem and one of great technical complexity, and unfortunately it is not possible to find a short-term solution to it. As I have stated before, we are committed to see whether we cannot find a solution on a longterm basis. As the hon. member will know, we have at his suggestion cleared the silt beds of the Umkozi River where it flows into the sanctuary. I know that we have problems at the estuary of the river itself at the moment, but these are as a result of the drought. Because of the increased demand for water on the upper reaches of the Umkozi the flow of the river was not the same as before. The result is that we now have this problem at the estuary. I know that to solve these problems planning and a lot of money are required, but I can assure the hon. member that the technical staff of the Department is committed to investigate these problems. I can give the hon. member the assurance that I am very perturbed about the situation and that we will do what we can as soon as we can. Unfortunately we must investigate the situation first before anything can be done. There is a suggestion that some sort of a weir should be built at the estuary and that something be done to regulate the flow of water to the sea, but at the moment I am not able to say what the most feasible thing to do is. My Department has been instructed to apply itself to this problem and to come forward, if possible, with a short-term solution or with a longterm solution as soon as possible.

Is that what the discussions with Mr. Kriel are about?

Yes. The hon. member for Mooi River asked me a question in connection with the use of the water of the Mooi River. The Department has made no decision yet. The thought will only be considered if the water in the Mooi River can be used to benefit the Umgeni Valley or elsewhere. Otherwise, it will be used for that purpose only. The principle will be that the best possible use of the Mooi River water will be made in the interest of the country as a whole. The Department is aware of the possibility of taking the Mooi River water to the Upper Tugela. The whole matter is being investigated, but not as a first priority.

*The hon. member for Waterberg referred to the construction of the Mogol Darn. He also referred to the various rivers which can supply water. Now I want to tell the hon. member that the assured supplies of the rivers are very poor. The rivers mentioned by him are fine rivers when they do flow. But they hardly ever flow. That is the difficulty with them. If a river flows only at rare intervals, it is not of much use. In that case there is not much one can do. But I think the hon. member may be satisfied that now the Mogol will be constructed. He will still recall how his predecessor spoke of the Mogol Dam every year. Well, now the Mogol Dam will be constructed.

†The hon. member for South Coast has made another point in connection with desalination. Of course, the hon. gentleman must know that the C.S.I.R. has spent a lot of money and manpower on this question of desalination. It is not South Africa alone, but other nations as well that spend a lot of money and time on this question. It is a result of this that we could have the possible breakthrough as regards the reclamation of water as we are using it at Windhoek at the moment. It will be followed by the private plant in Pretoria this year. But I can assure the hon. gentleman that in as far as we can apply ourselves, the staff of the Department of Water Affairs and the scientists of the C.S.I.R., to the question, we are putting everything into this job. I do not say that we are hoping to make the breakthrough, but we are certainly as far advanced in this field as the other nations who also apply themselves to research into the question of desalination.

The hon. member referred to the shortage of manpower. It is true; we have a shortage of manpower. It is a general shortage. But we are satisfied in the Department of Water Affairs that we are getting able men. They come slowly but they do come. We are satisfied that we are getting in more recruits every year. I hope within a few years we will be in a position to fill all the gaps that do exist at the present time.

*The hon. member for Fauresmith referred to the increase in production in the Department. The hon. member mentioned a figure and on the basis of that figure he indicated that the engineers of the Department of Water Affairs performed a fine feat by producing more per man than in the past. I am pleased the hon. member noticed that. I want to tell the hon. member that he is quite correct. The production per man, not only on the part of the engineers, but also on the part of other officials in the Department, increased considerably. I want to tell the hon. member that if he thinks back he will remember that it was not so long ago that we had a Budget of less than R30 million per annum. It now amounts to more than R100 million. The combined budget on Revenue and Loan Account amounts to virtually R120 million. The number of people who have to do the work, has not increased correspondingly. This number has not doubled over the past two years, which is clear from the Estimates. Their reason for that is that by means of better planning and organization and greater dedication on the part of the officials we have, we are breaking records as far as this is concerned. I maintain that the production per man compares favourably to the production per man in the private sector, also in the rest of the world. This holds good for not only the construction division but also the division of planning and designing. There are also the other divisions which execute the ordinary services, such as boring services. In addition there is the administrative division which executes work supplementary to the boring services. Production here increased by more than 200 per cent per person over the past 18 months. The dispatch of ordinary inquiries from farmers for smaller works increased by more than 140 per cent per person. In other words, the Department’s production per person increased considerably. This may be attributed to the fact that the Department is setting about its task with great dedication, that is has competent officials, that they are doing their work with the necessary enthusiasm, but especially to the fact that the necessary planning and co-ordination exist to render all this possible.

The hon. member referred to the Verwoerd Dam and the P. K. le Roux Dam. The hon. member wanted to know when construction work on the P. K. le Roux Dam would commence. We hope it will be possible to commence construction work in March next year. In the meantime tenders have been invited. Tenderers have visited the area and we hope to announce the successful tenderer before long. We hope to do this in March and thereupon the construction of the dam will be commenced immediately.

The hon. member also asked what progress had been made with the canals. The construction of canals cannot be taken beyond the first phase for which provision has been made. The first phase makes provision for a canal construction on both the right and left banks. The construction of the canal on the right bank has been commenced. The work has progressed far. The construction of the canal on the left bank, however, has not yet been commenced. When work on these two canal systems has reached an advanced stage, that will, it is hoped, synchronize with the completion of the dam itself. If in the meantime the necessary lay-out of the irrigation plots has also been effected, we shall be in a position which will allow us to proceed immediately to productive revenue. In other words, it will be possible, to settle people there who will be able to use the water productively.

The hon. member also made an important remark in connection with the Water Year. The hon. member said it was a pity that we might leave the impression on the outside world that our country had a severe shortage of water. One would not like to leave an impression like that. The impression could have been created as we had emphasized the shortage in South Africa. The Water Year office is doing everything within its power to add the second part of the message, as does the report of the Department and the commission, and that is that we are aware of the fact that a shortage may arise if we do nothing about this matter. If we were to export what is submitted to us in this report, we need have no fear that South Africa will have major water problems in the future. I, on my part, as well as the Secretary, take great care to emphasize not only the negative but also the positive. I think the message which may emanate from here to-day is that a people who have the faith and perseverance we have, need not fear that it will have a shortage of water in the future.

The hon. member for Piketberg referred to the Western Cape and expressed the fear that the necessary emphasis was not falling on agricultural development in the Western Cape. In other words, the hon. member is afraid that the agricultural situation will not be truly evaluated in the apportionment of the water of the Western Cape. I want to say at once that the Western Cape has one important natural resource, i.e. a good climate, and it is able to produce of the world’s best fruit and wines. The Western Cape does not have many other natural resources. The Western Cape also has water. If the willingness of the people, the good climate and the good soil can be combined with water, the revenue of this area can increase considerably. It has also been feared that Cape Town will receive an exceptionally large share of the water of the Western Cape for its own development. I believe it should be said at once that Cape Town should also prepare itself for the position that it will have to use other sources as well. In other words, the day will arrive when Cape Town will not have to look to the Berg River and the Breede River, but when it will have to look, provided it is within its economic means, to the sea for its water as soon as possible. Cape Town will also have to look to the re-use of water as a source of water, something about which a great deal can still be done. Cape Town will also have to look to those sources of water which cannot readily be utilized profitably for the agricultural industry. Here I have in mind, for example, the Palmiet River. The agricultural industry in the Boland deserves to receive its share of the water and it definitely will receive its share.

The hon. member for Piketberg said he was quite correct in saying that we should develop on a basis of continuity. We could not have water development on a small scale, leave the matter for a few years, and in that way allow a gap to develop. There should be continuous development. I want to give him the assurance that although we cannot announce at this stage the next projects envisaged, the new projects will be announced before the projects under construction at the moment have been completed so that there may be continuous development. A commission for the Cape Province has also been appointed. This commission is still working on its report. In the meantime, however, the commission has submitted an interim report to me. Therefore I do have an indication of what is being envisaged. The idea is that there is a key area in the environs of the Breede River and Berg River which ought to receive priority. Priority will be given to that key area. For the present it is also the idea to construct water conduits along the Berg River and the Breede River. I think this will have to be done. The necessary planning will have to be done before construction work can commecne. At this stage I may say with a reasonable degree of safety that the conduit along the Breede River will have to be constructed on the left bank. It would now appear as though the water from the left bank would have to be taken to the Nonna and the Nuy. A conduit will also have to be constructed on the right bank. There will also be a conduit along the Berg River so that its water may be taken to wherever it is required. I do not think we need go any further now. I just want to give the assurance that a very large share of the water will have to be earmarked for the agricultural industry, but fine calculations will have to be made of the economic boundaries of doing so. This is the opinion of the commission as well. When all relevant factors are weighed up against one another, priority will have to be given to areas on merit. If we follow this rule, i.e. to establish the necessary priorities, to weigh up the necessary interests against one another and to give the necessary recognition to the important agricultural industry, I think we shall be able to find a formula which will satisfy the hon. members who represent the Boland area. I think it will also satisfy the people in the Boland who are so dependent on water.

The hon. member for Piketberg also referred to the Clanwilliam Dam and expressed the idea that there should be further development. I must tell him that there is a dam at Clanwilliam and that these priorities will have to be weighed up against one another. I would be foolish if I were to bring the hon. member under the impression that that development would come prior to the completion of a few other essential projects.

For the present these are the only comments I have to make on the speeches of hon. members.

Mr. Chairman, may I put a question to the hon. the Minister with regard to the Albert Falls Dam?

Mr. Chairman, I shall reply to the question of the hon. member concerning the Albert Falls Dam later this evening.

Apart from the preliminary remarks made by the hon. the Minister in regard to the Boland water situation, I want to make a few remarks in this respect in pursuance of what was said by the hon. member for, Piketberg. But before coming to that, I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister on what I want to call the brilliant way in which the activities of this Water Year were launched. Sir, this has not only given a completely fresh meaning to the general image of the Department of Water Affairs, but the children of this fine country of ours have, in the past few months, been made aware of the water situation in South Africa more than ever before in the past. In passing, I want to express the thought as to whether it would not be possible for the hon. the Minister to make available a copy of the report of the Water Planning Commission to every high school library in the country. To my mind this will ensure that the imagination of the youth of South Africa will be properly tuned in as far as our water requirements are concerned; I can tell the hon. the Minister that the initiative and imagination on his part and on the part of his Department are taken cognizance of and are appreciated on a broad front, Apart from the few remarks made by the hon. member for Fauresmith concerning the old man with the magneto on his head, I want to tell the hon. the Minister that it is truly imaginative creative work that has been done over the past few months to focus the attention of the people of South Africa on this important matter. I think that Lean speak on behalf of this whole Committee when I say that the future of the water resources of South Africa and the utilization thereof are really in good hands.

I want to express a few thoughts here in regard to the future planning of the water potential of particularly the lesser Boland. I am aware of the fact that the contents of the report of the Boland Water Planning Commission, to which the hon. the Minister has just referred, has not become known generally. Personally, I do not know what is contained in the report. But, Sir, in the meantime something has happened which is of fundamental interest to us here in the Boland, and that is the announcement made by the hon. the Minister recently in regard to the enrichment of uranium. To my mind this announcement is basically significant particularly for us here in the Boland from two angles; in the first place, in respect of the possible desalination of sea water in future years, an aspect which has also been emphasized by the Water Planning Commission. I do not want to elaborate on this matter this afternoon, but there is a second aspect which, to my mind, will probably result from this is that we in the lesser Boland, where there are truly limited conservation areas, will probably be able as a result of this important announcement and the supply of electricity at a reduced rate which will result from this, to pump water on a large scale from one storage point to another.

Sir, in this situation there are particularly three storage points which, to my mind, will assume a completely fresh significance. The first is the Vogelvlei Dam, where a project is being completed at the moment and which will assume an entirely fresh significance in the lesser Boland set-up in future. This dam will assume a new central position. In the. first place, all the water from the Klein Berg River is going into this, dam; we have the diagonal canal from the Twenty Four Rivers which is nearing completion and, in addition, there is the fact that approximately 40 million gallons of water per day will flow from this dam to Cape Town and this region in future. Sir, I do not have any engineering background, but this dam is situated in my constituency. When I stand on the wall of that dam, it seems to me, purely on the face, of things, that it will be possible to expand the wall of this dam substantially. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to investigate the possibility of expanding this dam project even further than the present project which is nearing completion at the moment. The reason why I say this—and this really brings me to my second argument—is that the catchment area of the proposed Suurvlak Dam, which is going to serve the Tulbagh Valley in future, is situated on a much higher level than the Vogelvlei Dam. Judging again on the face of things, it seems to me that, when we use this Suurvlak Dam, which has a very poor catchment area but a Very large storage area, it will be possible for us to Create a network between this dam and the Vogelvlei Dam in future. In other words, if we pump a portion of the water of the Klein Berg River into this dam and even if we were to decide in future to add to this dam the water of the, say, Michell’s Pass, which is a fine catchment area, I think it will be possible to create a network between this dam and the Vogelvlei Dam which, in this smaller complex in the Boland, will bring about a completely new focal central position.

What is more I think that in view of the proposed ore project at Saldanha Bay we will have to give fresh consideration to the catchment area of the Lower Berg River, namely the proposed dam in the vicinity of Misverstand. I am aware of the fact that there is one major problem as regards the flow of water into this dam, and that is that the brackish content will probably be reasonably high, but I have tried to visualize a situation where one could possibly neutralize the brackish quality of the water if it were possible to pump some of the water of this dam into the Vogelvlei Dam at certain times of the year. In other words, I think we are going to have the situation that we shall virtually have a whole network of water provision in the Boland, a situation where one storage point can be connected with another and which may lead to our having one large focal point as far as the water situation in the Boland is concerned.

In other words, we will have to think on a much larger scale in future as far as our Boland water potential is concerned. I just want to express this thought: In view of the fact that we will have to plan much more thoroughly in future. I think we will have to consider whether it is not possible to convert this Water Planning Commission into a Water Board for the Boland. The fact remains that we here in the Boland, where we are working towards a network, will no longer be able to continue without an overall planning of our Boland water structure being carried out. I want to advance a with the hon. the Minister that he should investigate the possibility of converting this Water Planning Commission, with the necessary additions of expert assistance from other bodies such as the Cape Town City Council and the surrounding Boland areas, into a Water Board which will see to it that our Boland water potential will be planned on a wider basis in future.

One final matter I want to raise, is one which more particularly concerns my constituency as such. At the moment we are taking the surplus water from the Twenty-four Rivers and diverting it with a diagonal canal into the Vogelvlei Dam. At this stage the project is virtually completed and, in passing, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that it is remarkable with what speed work is being carried out on this canal. In the past there were occasions when we said to one another, “This Department of Water Affairs does have a great deal of time!” This image has changed completely and I can tell the hon. the Minister that it is really remarkable how seriously and expeditiously work is being carried out on these proposed projects in this area. Sir, this Twenty-four Rivers canal takes the surplus water from the Twenty-four Rivers to the Vogelvlei project. I want to tell the hon. the Minister that his predecessor has on occasion pointed out that he will not allow the percentage of this water which is being diverted to the Vogelvlei area to be increased until such time as provision has been made for the basic needs of areas in the vicinity of Porterville and places such as Pools, Eendekuil, and areas in the north of the district of Piketberg. [Time expired.]

I have listened with interest to the speech made by the hon. member for Moorreesburg and I am sure that many of the constructive suggestions he made in regard to the development of the Boland as an important water area in South Africa will receive the Minister’s attention. I think it is now about four or five years that Die Burger carried huge banner headlines saying something like “Oranjeplan vir die Boland”, but the poor people of the Western Province are still waiting for that plan.

However. I want to come to the hon. the Minister himself. I found his excited and almost excitable reaction to the speech of the hon. member for Turffontein most interesting, but I found it quite understandable, too. and I shall tell you, Sir. why. The hon. the Minister talked about talking politics and he even challenged us to talk politics. I do not want to talk politics, except in so far as it concerns an important national problem like water affairs, and in so far as I can try to persuade this Government at last to carry out this plan which has now been presented to them. Sir, this is an excellent plan. Nobody doubts that for one moment.

It is about water, not mud

It is an excellent plan. The hon. member will find a mud bath in their dams that are always silting up. This is an excellent plan and the commission is to be congratulated on what they have done, but why does the Minister get up and say it is entirely the policy of the Nationalist Party and it has always been their policy that existing areas should be developed? Is it? Has it always been the policy to develop the existing areas according to full economic demands as far as the Vaal basin and the Southern Transvaal complex are concerned? Why did we have a Physical Planning Act? Why did we have a promise that from 1978 the Bantu people would be moving out of those areas and the flow would be starting back to the Reserves? Sir. this party had a plan long before the Government even thought of introducing a water plan. I see the previous Minister of Water Affairs over there laughing, but he is no longer Minister of Water Affairs, and why not? Because he had no plan and therefore he was put out of the Cabinet, and his Deputy was transferred to the Railways. No, this party had a policy and it stated those four points of its policy before this Government came with its Water Commission, before it appointed that Water Commission to find out what its policy should be, as was also done in the case of television.

Sir, I believe this excellent report and its acceptance by the Government is actually going to strike at the very roots of the basic policies of the Nationalist Party. I say this particularly in relation to the recommendations in regard to the Vaal basin, the Vaal Triangle and the Southern Transvaal industrial complex. This Water Commission is planning ahead for that complex. It is planning ahead to increase the water potential of that area threefold by the year 2000. Where to-day 621 million gallons are being taken out of the Vaal Dam, this commission is planning for 1,800 million gallons per day to be taken out of that whole complex in the year 2000. It says that from the whole complex you can in fact take more than four times as much water, namely 2,600 million gallons a day compared with the 621 million gallons to-day. That is a clear indication that all this idea of there not being sufficient water in the Vaal River and in that area that industries will have to be cut down and that border industries would have to be developed instead. was basically false.

What is the important projection on which this Water Commission has based its findings? It has worked on a very important population projection which believes that the white population in the Vaal basin area will increase from 1970 (I have taken the average of the Commission’s figure for 1960 and 1980) to the year 2000 from 1.7 million to 2.5 million. Here is now the interesting point: The projection on which the Water Commission has worked is further that the Bantu population of the Vaal basin area will increase from 4.5 million to 8.8 million, more than double in that area where there are scarely any homelands. There is the collapse of apartheid and here is the document that killed the homelands policy. I am glad of this document, Sir, and I am glad to have this admission.

I say that now that we have got these facts. let us admit that that area will, as this Water Report says, be carrying 5 million more people by the year 2000, in a scant 30 years’ time, than it does to-day. Let this Government get going, not only with its planning, but with the carrying out of the plan itself. After all, in 1950 the Natural Resources Development Council already gave the basic facts to the Government. It took 16 long years before this Commission was appointed. The hon. Minister used a very significant phrase when he said that the water of the Vaal Dam was over-drawn: yes, overdrawn as money is overdrawn at a bank. Why are we always living on an overdrawn account as far as our water resources in this country is concerned?

I was impressed by what this report said about the vast potential of water resources which still exists in the Vaal basin and also in the adjacent areas. It is a terrific potential which is available and I appeal to the hon. Minister as well as to the hon. the Prime Minister to leave ideological consideration aside now that we have this report of the commission and let us go forward towards sound economic planning which is based on the fact that you can have three times the water potential in that Vaal area that we have to-day. It can be done, as it has been pointed out, by the Bloemhof Dam and by other storage Works on the Vaal, the re-use of water, by underground storage in dolomitic compartments and also by sensible use of the exbow, Tugela and the Caledon area schemes. I repeat, the implications of this report are terrific for the Witwatersrand and the other areas and it could put an end to the moans, the jeremiads and the complaints of people on the other side, it could put an end to the pessimists who see no future for the Witwatersrand and that area, because apparently there is not sufficient water in that area.

Why must the ordinary citizens of a city such as Johannesburg suffer the petty irritations every year of the unnecessary water restrictions simply because the hon. the Minister said that the Vaal Dam is overdrawn? When I say “unnecessary”, I do not mean that it is unnecessary under the present circumstances. They would not have been necessary if this Government had done much more during the past 20 years in that regard. What did that hon. ex-Minister do in those 20 years to improve the position of water in the Witwatersrand area? Out of every gallon of water used in the Johannesburg municipality’s area, by all the industries and by all the householders. the amount used by gardens, swimming pools and so forth is less than the size of an ordinary tot of brandy or whisky in a single gallon: that is if you take into account that 75 per cent of such water used flows back again into the river or into the catchment area. I hope that all householders in Johannesburg or wherever they are. who are subject to these water restrictions, will realize that, firstly, they are doing their duty as citizens to assist in such a crisis and, secondly, that these restrictions have been forced on them through 20 years of lack of planning, through 20 years of delay, through 20 years of weakness and through 20 years of a lack of foresight.

Mr. Chairman, as is typical of the hon. the Opposition, the previous speaker once again tried to say something poisonous about a debate in which there should be no room for politics. He tried to make out that the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Affairs would mean the downfall of our policy of separate development. This is typical of the United Party. They are in the habit of talking nonsense. The United Party may “collapse”, but our policy of separate development will never “collapse”. I also find it regrettable that the hon. member for Orange Grove has seen fit to drag the hon. member for Oudtshoorn into this debate and to criticize him. I think the hon. member for Oudtshoorn, in his time, played his part towards the development of agriculture and the water potential of South Africa. I wonder whether the hon. member for Orange Grove knows that when his party was in office, a meagre R3 million to R4 million per year was voted for the Department of Water Affairs. I wonder whether he knows that we can boast to-day of a total appropriation of R118 million for this Department.

I am grateful and I am glad that the hon. the Minister spoke about the Boland this afternoon, and also, by name, about the Bree River area. The Boland is exclusively and mainly an agricultural area. We do not have any mineral wealth. Neither do we have any large-scale industrial expansion in the Boland. I see in the report of the Department that the contribution of agriculture towards the net local product decreased from 21.6 per cent in 1925 to 9.2 per cent at present, despite the fact that agriculture was the largest consumer of water, namely 83 per cent of the stored water. The Boland is an agricultural area and we have problems. During the summer months there is an acute water shortage on our farms, particularly during the late summer when the vineyards and orchards have to be given at least two additional applications of water in order to enable the crop to ripen well and to assist the trees to gather strength for the following year’s crop. For that reason it is so important to us here in the Boland, and particularly in the Bree River area Where there are approximately 184 mountain farms in my constituency alone which are dependent upon rain water, that they should have additional water to be able to provide, these important one or two additional applications of water during the months of January and February, It often happens that farmers lose up to half their crop as a result of drought because the vines and the fruit trees simply cannot ripen the crop. In these cases the income of the farmers easily drops by one-third to less than the normal income.

There is a need for our irrigation techniques to be developed in such a way that we can make the maximum use of the available water. We try to save water through spray irrigation, but—and there I agree with the report of the Commission—that we have not yet found the final answer to an efficient irrigation and water utilization scheme. For that reason and with a view to the fact that pleas have been advanced here for the establishment. of a research institute for irrigation. I want to support that plea wholeheartedly. I am also glad that the hon. the Minister has said that agriculture in the Boland will never be neglected as far as its water requirements are concerned. In this connection I also find it encouraging to read the fine thought expressed by the hon. S. P. le Roux in which he said the following: “The cultural and stabilizing spiritual influence of a healthy farming element in the national set-up should be conserved and developed as far as possible”. For that reason I am particularly grateful to hear from the hon. the Minister that the agricultural sector will always be assisted so that it does not suffer any damage as a result of a scarcity of water.

If I am allowed, I should like to mention the name of a farmers’ association from the Bree River valley who have, through the years, devoted their energies in the interests of more water, I am referring to the “Verenigde Breerivier-vereniging”. If I may mention another name linked with this association, I want to mention the name of the Secretary of that association, namely Mr. P. Naudé. He is a farmer in the district of Worcester. Over the years and regardless of time, money and trouble Mr. Naudé and the members of this association furnished the Department of Water Affairs with all possible information they regarded necessary to Compile in this respect. These people are not selfish people. These are the people who have devoted their energies over the years to furnishing these facts and all possible assistance to the hon. the Minister, but particularly to his Department, in this fine valley of ours through which almost one million morgen feet of water runs every year, of which only approximately 8 per cent is used per year. I want to pay tribute to them, because I think that these people have, during the past years, actively supported the idea of the water storage on a large scale with the Department of Water Affairs. Here we have a river with a tremendous amount of water, but only a small portion of it is being utilized Now, it is a fact that we. have the Brandvlet Dam. The Kwaegaskloof scheme, which is going to be used in consolidation, is being erected at present. But I said earlier on that there were approximately 180 mountain farms, in this constituency alone which do not enjoy the benefit from this scheme. We know that the Boland Water Committee has submitted a preliminary report to the Minister. We are grateful for that May I at this stage deal for a moment with our hon. the Minister and tell him that the farmers in the Bree River valley have the highest regard for his accessibility, his approachability and his Willingness to listen to their representations. They are hopeful that this Minister, with his Department. is planning something magnificent and sound for the Bree River valley.

But I want to make, a request. While these schemes of which we have heard this after noon and which are contemplated for the future, may take many years before they materialize, I wonder whether it is not possible for us to establish more pump schemes along this river as a temporary solution. I am thinking of two cases where farmers have on their Own initiative, hut with the assistance of the State, of course, already started such pump schemes. Sir, in the cases of many of these people it is either an expensive water scheme or it is a case of their getting ruined. I am thinking of one group of farmers who came to see the hon. the Minister last year. They received assistance from him and I have no words to tell him how grateful these people are. For that reason I wonder whether the hon. the Minister will not perhaps give the idea of more pump schemes as a temporary solution his favourable consideration.

In conclusion, I want to say that the Bree River has a great deal of water, but few dam sites. Nevertheless, I want to advance a plea that, if possible, we should not use valuable agricultural land for dam sites. However, I think there are some fine mountain gorges which can be dammed up. The hon. member for Piketberg mentioned one this afternoon. It may be that certain roads will have to be re-routed as a result of this, but this will be a non-recurrent expense. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman. I am sure the hon. the Minister has listened very carefully to what the hon. member for Worcester had to say. as well as to the several Boland speakers who made special pleas for their area. We all love the Boland, and we say to those who want to see the Boland preserved and prospering: “More strength to your elbow.”

In passing, I should just like to make a reference to what the hon. the Minister said a bit earlier when he referred to the staff position in his Department. He said that he was satisfied “that the Department is getting able men”. We all agree with him in that respect. Then he added: “They come slowly, but they do come.” We are just a little worried about what might seem to be complacency on his part. I hope it is not. He sounded just a little complacent. We on this side of the House would like to see him rather more aggressive when it comes to the matter of the staff in his Department. I must say, too, that if one looks at his report for last year, one sees that of the 239 posts of engineers on the establishment, only 130 were filled, leaving 109 vacancies. That position has since improved; but although the establishment has gone up to 271, there are still 97 vacancies. It seems as though for the last five years we have had a chronic shortage of engineers in the Department of somewhere around 100. Another factor which should give us cause for concern is the number of vacancies in the various posts of hydrologist. The position at the moment is that there are 34 posts of which no fewer than 13 are vacant. In other words, only 21 are filled.

I should briefly like to compliment the hon. the Minister's Department on one thing, which is that they were obviously not worried about language problems when they recruit some immigrant engineers who were not fully conversant either with English or Afrikaans. I refer to the Czech refugees. According to the hon. the Minister they recruited 24 immigrants, nine of whom were not fluent in or conversant with either of our languages. That, however, did not seem to worry them. I am glad to see the position now is that none of these engineers is still not conversant with English or Afrikaans.?

I am sorry that the hon. the Minister earlier took umbrage at the first principle of our water policy, which is that the supply of water should be guaranteed to the existing communities. It is basic. It is something which we have insisted upon for a very long time. I think it is something which has not always been observed. I want to direct the attention of the hon. the Minister to what I believe has been the unfair treatment of an existing rural community. The community to which I refer are the farmers who normally abstract water from the Orange River between the site of the P. K. le Roux Dam and the confluence of the Orange and the Vaal Rivers. The hon. the Minister is by now aware of the fact that members of the Hopetown Besproeiingsvereniging …

You are far from your constituency now.

I will come to the hon. member in a moment. It was an interesting interjection. The members of the Vereniging are particularly aggrieved at the summary manner in which they have been treated, the manner in which their rights to draw water for irrigation purposes have either been curtailed or actually completely suspended. We are well aware of the fact that during this year the flow of the Orange River has caused grave concern to a number of people and bodies that depend on this river for their existence. It was inevitable that certain restrictions had to be imposed on people who drew water from the Orange and that some of these restrictions in fact had to be harsh. The Vereniging, I think, accepts the view that restrictions had to be imposed, but made two points which I think the hon. the Minister should reply to. The first is that they feel that they were discriminated against in the application of the restrictions and secondly, they feel that when they were finally forbidden to abstract water from the Orange in terms of a notice from the hon. the Minister’s Department dated 29th April, they were given no period of notice.

I cannot hear.

I am sorry, I have a hit of a cold. They were given no period of notice and suffered unnecessary and quite serious losses through having ploughed and planted crops.

That is none of your business.

It has plenty to do with me.

It is none of your business.

If you had worried about it then I would not be talking. They feel that they have suffered unnecessary losses which in some cases are quite substantial. Had they been given proper notice they would not have planted crops. In the case of farmers between the site of the P. K. le Roux Dam and the confluence of the Orange and the Vaal they were forbidden to abstract water for irrigation from April of this year. Those farmers above the site of the proposed P. K. le Roux Dam were only restricted from 7th August of this year. That was after the other farmers lower down the river had complained to the Minister. When they did complain the Minister himself seemed to be quite unaware of this disparity.

In fact, when a deputation of the Besproeiingsvereniging went to see him, he even challenged them on this point. He did not seem to know what regulations his Department had made. According to my information, he actually asked if they knew of instances of farmers who were drawing water from above the P. K. le Roux Dam, so that he could take steps against them. I think the hon. the Minister will tell us if that is so, for that is the information that has been relayed to me. These farmers were aggrieved because they were given no period of notice. Now the Minister has told me, in reply to a question, that they are also not going to be compensated for any losses they might have suffered through the summary cutting off of their Water. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister that one must understand that these farmers feel very upset about this.

Now, when they sent a memorandum to him and a copy to the hon. member for De Aar, they raised the specific complain that, while they were not allowed to abstract water to irrigate their land, the S.A. Railways according to them were wasting water at Orange River station.

You do not know what you are talking about.

This was in the memorandum that was sent to the hon. member for De Aar and to the hon. the Minister. The Minister has acknowledged to me, in reply to a question, that he received the memorandum. The memorandum was received, in fact, on 27th July. I think the Minister should tell us why, in the face of this information, he did not even take this complaint to the hon. Minister of Transport. I asked the hon. Minister of Transport a month later whether he had had any complaints about the wastage of water at Orange River station. He said that he had not received any, in spite of the fact that the memorandum from the Hopetown Besproeiingsvereniging had specifically asked the hon. the Minister to take up this matter. The hon. member for De Aar was perfectly aware of this. The hon. member behind me asked me what I had to do with it. I can say that I would have had nothing to do with it …

You are confusing two completely different things.

… if the hon. member for De Aar over there would do his job properly [Interjections.] I do think that the hon. the Minister should explain these anomalies to us. Why, for instance, was it necessary to prevent the farmers situated below the dam, between the P. K. le Roux Dam and the confluence of the two rivers, from abstracting water entirely for a considerable period, when there were no restrictions whatever on the farmers above the site of the proposed P. K. le Roux Dam? I think the hon. Minister should also tell us why his Department has decided not to compensate farmers who have suffered through what I can only describe as his Department’s failure to warn them in good time that restrictions were likely to be imposed. [Time expired.]

I have no intention of following up what was said by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, because he made a very strong accusation against the hon. member for De Aar. He did not actually attack me. What I do want to say, however, is that from the little I can deduce from what he said, he knows very little about the whole scheme. He knows nothing about it. Mr. Vorster, and I especially, who have been engaged on that scheme for many years, know what is going on. The dam is being built. A very long canal is being built, and thousands of morgen under irrigation will be allocated to farmers, as well as grazing, in order to place the fodder bank of this country on a basis such as it has never been on before. Now the hon. member comes along and attacks the hon. member for De Aar. I am sorry he has done that.

It is the farmers who are doing it.

No, wait a bit. From the questions which have been placed on the Question Paper from time to time, I can see that there is a bit of political intrigue (knoeiery) behind it. I am very sorry that the hon. member for Orange Grove …

Order! The word “intrigue” is unparliamentary.

May I use the word “wrangling” (konkel), Mr. Chairman?

No.

Well, then I shall use the second best word. He did something which is not permissible.

The hon. member for Orange Grove usually gives vent to a few cheap political points. This debate was being conducted on a very high level. The hon. member for South Coast had introduced this debate on a very high level. Hon. members on both sides of the House who participated in this debate had kept it on a high level, but then the hon. member for Orange Grove came along and said: “You should have followed our policy; you had no plan for conserving water in this country.” But, Sir, at this very moment we are engaged in the construction of the two largest dams in this country. One, the H. F. Verwoerd Dam, is almost complete; it will be completed next year by June/July or September. The date of completion depends upon the circumstances. At the end of this year construction of the P. K. le Roux Dam will commence. These will be the two largest dams in the country. One bears the name of the hon. member for Oudtshoorn, the previous Minister; it does not bear the name of Etienne Malan; and the other one is called the H. F. Verwoerd Dam; it does not bear the name of Etienne Malan either. I am very sorry that the hon. member, in this very important Water Year, a year during which there has been such a tremendous shortage of water, has dragged politics into the matter.

Political pollution.

I am very happy to have been afforded the opportunity of making a short speech. The year 1969-’70 is our Water Year, and incidentally it is also the year in which there has been the least water in the country as a result of the continual droughts we have been experiencing over many years. The Orange River, in which these large dams are being built, virtually dried up two months ago, and not one single farmer was allowed to pump water from that river, or there would have been no water for the H. F. Verwoerd Dam. Our main problem is that all our rivers dried up in 1969-’70. This, surely, is something over which the Minister has no control. All our dams and water sources dried up. Our fodder bank in this country disappeared completely. There was not even 1,000 tons of lucerne obtainable in the entire Republic of South Africa. The farmers had to resort to feeding their animals on mealie stalks.

The Minister is now making the necessary provision, and if the Almighty blesses us with sufficient rains to fill the H. F. Verwoerd and P. K. le Roux Dams, we will be safe for the future; then there will once more be a fodder bank in the country. As sure as we stand here, droughts will occur again. As a result of the lack of water we experienced not only in 1969-’70, but also in the years previous to that, our sheep population has remained virtually static; the lamb yield for 1969-’70 has been almost wiped out as a result or the lack of water; not 10 per cent remains, and the lambs which have reached maturity are worth nothing because, in farmers’ language, they are “boepensooie” (pot-bellied ewes). Sir, hence it is the duty of each one of us to become water conscious. I think all of us waste water, even the hon. member for Orange Grove. Many of us have the habit of washing our hands under a running tap, with the result that we use perhaps half a gallon of water where one pint would have been sufficient.

Then you have windmills, thousands of them all over the Republic. I have said in the House before, and I repeat it to-day, just to tell the farmers, that since we have now become water conscious, some plan or other ought to be devised for attaching automatic brakes to our windmills. If there is no brake, the dam overflows and more water than is used for drinking purposes runs over the dam wall and simply causes parasites to breed round the dam.

Then I come to the case of deep-water pumps. One perhaps drills a hole and gets quite a strong flow of water. I ask the Minister again to-day, whether it is a popular idea or not, to prohibit water being pumped at the maximum flow. I heard the Minister say in his speech this afternoon that our water level has dropped. It has dropped a great deal. Partly this is due to the drought and partly to ourselves. Having pumped 10,000 or 12,000 or 14,000 gallons from a borehole, you try to pump 12,000 gallons continually now and the borehole will not take it; it must give in. Consequently the water level becomes so low that you have to drill deeper, and you install a deeper pump and you get a repetition of the whole thing. How many springs were there not before? When I was a young man, there were thousands of springs in the Karoo. Each farm had a spring, and most of the farm names ended in “-fontein”. But go and see how many springs you can find to-day. They have all dried up, mostly as a result of deep-level water pumps. Only to-day I came across the figures in this report of how many millions of rands the State has provided to farmers to undertake irrigation works and build dams to store water. But that is still not enough. We have a tremendous water shortage in the country. I do not know if it is a practical possibility, but I want to ask that the catchment of rain water should be investigated. Take the season which has just passed in the Western Cape. If the millions of gallons which have run into the sea could have been stored it would have been of great help. The hon. the Minister spoke here to-day of underground storage. If we could have underground storage of water which now runs to waste in the rainy season, it would not be necessary to take one gallon of water from Steenbras or Wemmershoek. [Time expired.]

More than three-quarters of South Africa lies in the low rainfall areas, so that we may expect seasonal water shortages, and therefore it is so essential that there should be planning for the future. Accordingly I welcome this report which has been tabled. My only regret is that it was not tabled a great many years ago. The hon. the Minister must therefore not blame us for saying that years ago already the United Party discussed planning and formulated a policy for meeting our water problems.

But you did nothing, because you were not in power.

The principle of the United Party was to lay down a water policy so that all existing communities would have a guaranteed supply of water, and this is not unreasonable to me, but is completely logical. One cannot blame existing communities for expecting to have a continued water supply in future so that they can expand their capital investments and get a return from them. We saw how in recent years the established quotas of communities were cut as a result of water shortages. The farmers could not plan for the future. I am thinking of old established irrigation schemes in the Lower Vaal area as well as in the Lower Orange River area, to which a previous speaker referred. There was talk that irrigation farmers would have to attach meters to their pumps in order to limit their pumping capacity and that they would have to let certain irrigation lands lie fallow and would have to give up quotas which had existed for many years, such as at Douglas. This unplanned and uncontrolled expansion which was allowed in the past and which was quite in excess of the water supply available is an indication to me of the bad planning which was the order of the day in the past. Every year water rationing is common in the urban areas, and we have seen how citydwellers are limited every year in respect of the quantity of water they are allowed to use. Admittedly it was for less essential purposes, such as the watering of gardens, that it was limited, but we have nevertheless seen how more and more inhabitants of towns and cities have come to rely more and more on boreholes and have helped themselves. There are numerous municipalities and towns which are dependent on borehole water and subterranean water, and I think it is essential that there should be planning in respect of the control of that subterranean water. Mining development in South Africa is being resticted by the shortage of water. I know that at the Uis tin mine in South-West Africa they have to mix salt or brackish water with fresh water just to be able to keep that mine going for Iscor. The Finch mine and Lime Acres in Grioualand West had similar water problems, in that the borehole water which they first relied on, gradually became insufficient, so that they then had to proceed to pumping water from the Vaal River. Sishen and the whole future development there is dependent on borehole water, except in so far as their water supply can be supplemented by this new proposed scheme.

Dropping water tables are the order of the day and, as the hon. member for Colesberg said, our springs are drying up all over the country. In order to ensure the continued existence of farming communities it is essential that that subterranean water be controlled, particularly in the dolomitic areas which extend over a large part of South Africa. The dolomitic areas extend from Douglas on the Orange River up to Vryburg, where they disappear below other geological formations, and then they reappear on the surface on the Witwatersrand and at Brits and in large parts of the Transvaal. It is generally known that the carbon dioxide in the air is absorbed by the rain water, forming a slightly acidic solution which gradually causes great holes to dissolve out of the dolomitic formation, which are ideal storing places for subterranean water. In the Northern Cape Province in particular we have seen how farmers have bored open these subterranean water supplies and have wonderful water available for a short while. They put up big turbine pumps to irrigate some lucerne for a short while, and then one day they find there is no water left when that dolomitic compartment has been completely exhausted. The whole Northern Cape area, the arid North-West, is dependent on subterranean water for its farming. The farmers are adversely affecting their neighbours’ stock watering places by pumping that water out, and this can Constitute a threat to the survival of the Northern Cape as a farming region. Much more geological research has to be carried out in this connection.

In the popular agricultural Press we see that recommendations are made to the effect that these subterranean waters can be supplemented by pumping water out of rivers and into boreholes. There are many farmers who are seriously concerned about these proposals, because it has been mentioned that river water can be dammed up in watercourses and ditches in order to supplement the subterranean water through boreholes. We know that dung and sticks and all sorts of impurities would therefore run into the subterranean sources and pollute those sources, making them unfit for human consumption. I know of places where there are dolomitic formations and where the water supply of communities has been polluted to such an extent by sewers, French drains and sewerage pits and it has become unfit for human consumption. I feel it is essential that action should be taken in such cases, even if only in exceptional ones. In recent years we have seen how our rivers have been polluted, not by industries, but by farmers who caused this in ignorance by the excessive use of insecticides as well as the excessive use of artificial fertilizers and over-irrigation. As a result of over-irrigation we find that the water seeps into the rivers and then this kills off hundreds of thousands of fish in the Lower Vaal area. The fact that the river runs so slowly, thus causing an oxygen shortage in the water, may also contribute to this problem.

Over-irrigation is also a problem to which this Government should pay attention in its future research. It has been found that the production in areas such as the Vaalhartz and the Vaallus and the vicinity of Douglas increases enormously in times when there are restrictions, because the water table has dropped and the root systems of the plants have been able to develop. There are cases where plants withered within two to three days after being irrigated, because they had such weakly developed root systems. This over-irrigation is a waste of water, makes the soil brackish and results in low production. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I listened to the hon. member for Benoni, who has just sat down, and I heard him complaining about the lack of water for farmers and about the lack of planning. I must tell him in the first place that the lack of water for farmers is primarily due to the drought. We have no control over that. In the second place, when he speaks of a lack of planning, and as he has referred to the Northern Cape, I want to tell him that all Governments up to 1948 spent only R9 million on capital works in the Cape over a period of 58 years. From 1948 when the National Party came into power, and throughout the next 20 years up to and including 1968, the National Party spent no less than R115 million on capital works in the Cape alone. We therefore spent 13 times more in 20 years’ time than all the previous Governments had made available to the Cape Province during the previous 58 years.

You should go to Klip River.

Klip River will look after itself, and hon. members need not refer me to Klip River. When we look at 1970 as the Water Year, its first feature is the particularly large-scale publicity campaign which has been launched by the Department of Water Affairs. The object of that publicity campaign is to bring water in all its facets pointedly to the attention of the man or woman in the street. In meeting the needs of the ordinary man or woman, he or she is the biggest consumer of water in South Africa and, I have to add, also the biggest waster of water. I am sure that this publicity campaign required a great deal in the way of money, effort and planning, but I think that in the end the effort has been more than worthwhile if we consider what has been achieved by the campaign.

I now want to mention a few aspects of this campaign which I have found particularly striking. In the first place, we have had the documentary film “Water, our Life-Blood”. This is a true life film which will be seen by millions, and I cannot help but think that it will have a good influence on many people. In the second place, the Department of Posts and Telegraphs also did their share and issued a special postage stamp in order to commemorate the Water Year. For many years to come this will remind philatelists of the fact that we had a Water Year. On the 2½ cent stamp the emblem of the Water Year is depicted, i.e. the falling drop of water with four leaves depicted below it like receiving hands catching and using the drop.

A competition was also run for children who collect postmarks that has a bearing on water. When we involve children in something like this, we cannot but say that this is a very good cause. We have also seen the newsletter of the Department’s Water Year office. It is a neatly drafted and attractive letter and it makes interesting reading. I am sure many readers enjoyed that letter immensely. In addition there were numerous advertisements in periodicals and news publications which had tremendous scope. The Department had the specialized services of a Cape Town advertising firm for this work. These people know how to bring something effectively to the attention of the public, and I cannot but congratulate this firm on the task they set themselves and on what they have already achieved. Especially their drawings I have found particularly striking. Responsible bodies throughout the country, for example, agricultural associations, held Water Year evenings or days, and I am sure they duly informed their communities of our water problems and made them aware of these problems.

When one reviews all these matters, I find two aspects of this publicity particularly striking. It has become evident from the publicity that we have sufficient water if we satisfy two conditions. These conditions are that we should not, in the first place, waste water and, in the second place, pollute water. Throughout this publicity campaign I have found in rather striking that a delicate balance has been maintained between too much water on the one hand and too little water on the other hand. It was interesting when my colleague, the hon. member for Fauresmith, mentioned that he had gained the impression as far as newspapers were concerned, that we had placed too much emphasis on too little water. It might be the newspapers that conveyed that impression to the readers, but the publicity and the advertisements of the Department of Water Affairs were in fact aimed at not conveying an image to people abroad or to anyone else that we have too little water in this country. I think they succeeded admirally in bringing this delicate balance to the attention of all people. Their first point was that we have sufficient water as long as we do not waste it. The proper usage and re-usage of water will ensure our having sufficient water to meet all our requirements for many years to come. There is vertually no-one who is not guilty of wasting water at some time or another. So many good and practical faints are given to the public which, if they just want to apply them, will have a tremendous influence on our water consumption on the whole. I am just thinking of how much water could not have been saved over the years by the very simple habit of placing a brick or two in the cistern of a flush toilet.

When we come to this aspect, i.e. that we should not pollute water, we should have regard to the fact that all our water life, the water animals, fish and rocklobster, can only continue to exist if they live in clean, pure water. We should not think of the sea, the immense ocean, as the garbage dump of the country. We should also exercise care with regard to what is dumped into the sea and that that will not cause the death of marine life at some future time. If we examine reports on the extent of marine pollution, as well as the pollution of certain of the rivers of Europe, such as the Rhine, in which fish cannot live any longer, we must realize that this is a timeous warning to us to ensure also in this respect that the rivers and streams of South Africa will not suffer the same fate.

When we summarize all these ideas, we may say that this publicity campaign and the advertisements in particular, have made our people water-conscious. I do not doubt this for one moment. It has served a particularly good purpose. But now it will be the task ot the Minister and his officials not only to make us water-conscious, a task in which they have already succeeded, but also to keep us water-conscious. That is our major task of the future. Up to the moment we have made people alert. They have been alerted and know what to do. At the moment the position is quite favourable, but we shall have to maintain this position in the future. The rising generation is quick to forget, and will constantly have to be reminded that South Africa does, in fact, have sufficient water, if we do not waste and pollute it.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Mossel Bay started off by saying that under this Government more had been spent on the construction of dams and the conservation of our water resources than ever before.

The figures prove that.

I am not disputing the figures which the hon. member furnished, because no country is standing still. But I want to point out to the hon. member that some of the best schemes ever undertaken in South Africa were carried out during the rule of the United Party Government. If, for example, the hon. member takes the Vaalhartz scheme, which was carried out when a United Party Government was in power, he finds that it is such a good scheme that it still serves to-day as an example to people outside of how we planned the layout of our irrigation schemes and what we did to conserve our water. It is regarded by experts from all over the world as one of the best schemes ever carried out in South Africa, and not only here, but also in the rest of the world. The hon. member and his friends on that side are proud of the Orange River scheme now. However, I have taken a quick look at the debates we conducted in 1959, for example, when that hon. gentleman, the present member for Oudtshoorn, was the new Minister of Water Affairs. On that occasion there was a motion before the House which had been moved by the then member for Albany.

Business suspended at 6.30 p.m. and resumed at 8.05 p.m.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, before we adjourned for supper, I was dealing with the Orange River scheme. I was saying that that scheme was not exactly the brainchild of this Government, but that they were strongly opposed to the implementation of the Orange River scheme in 1959. I should like to refer hon. members to a speech made by the then Minister of Water Affairs, Mr. P. K. le Roux. I want to refer hon. members to his Hansard of 13th March, 1959 (column 2510). It is interesting how everything which the Government wants to forget, takes place on 13th March. This is Mr. P. K. le Roux speaking. With regard to the canals and tunnels which had to be made, he said the following—

Only a few paragraphs on he says—

He was referring to the Sundays River and the Fish River valleys.

He continued—

This very scheme was announced, but it took them from 1959 to 1962 to come to realize the wisdom of the then so-called Conroy scheme. For that reason I say that any great scheme ever announced in South Africa, had always been ones announced by the United Party, and not by the Nationalist Party. If these schemes had been carried into effect shortly after they came into power in 1948, our farmers in the Sundays River valley, for example, would not have been saddled with the tremendous burden they now have to bear because they do not have water for their plots.

Mr. Chairman, I do not always want to remind the hon. the Minister of things they have omitted to do. We on this side of the House also want to tell him that during this Water Year we are prepared to give serious attention to the saving of what we have in small quantities. But I want to refer the hon. the Minister to a speech made some time ago by the hon. member for Moorreesburg. The hon. member for Moorreesburg said on that occasion that it was possible to change the Orange River scheme and to supply a number of Karoo towns with water by means of a canal system, etc. The hon. member envisaged that dozens of Karoo villages would then be able to have their own irrigation scheme each. Now I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether a change has been affected in connection with this Orange River scheme or whether the hon. member for Moorreesburg was simply talking nonsense. On that occasion that hon. member envisaged that it would be possible to change this scheme and that most of the Karoo towns could become garden villages—I think that was the phrase he used—in the future. I think we and this Committee are entitled to know whether the hon. the Minister is envisaging something of the kind, and if so, whether all the other various phases of the original Orange River scheme will still be carried into effect. I hope the hon. the Minister will give us a reply in this respect.

I said we would like to assist the hon. the Minister in this Water Year. If there is one respect in which we can help it most certainly is to bring it to the attention of the population of South Africa, Whites as well as non-White, how essential it is for us to use our water in the most economic way. I want to confine myself especially to what is taking place in our cities to-day. We shall need the largest quantities of water in these areas in future, not only because of the increase in the number of water consumers, but also because of increasing extension in the field of industry. I wonder whether we are doing enough to bring into circulation before it flows into the sea, the enormous quantity of water—I am referring to storm water—which flows towards the sea in our urban areas in particular, and to store it in our dams. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the boasting of the hon. member for Newton Park at the beginning of his speech, is really just pure Streicher big talk which does not have much substance. The hon. member made much of the hon. member for Oudtshoorn’s allegedly having opposed the Orange River scheme. Then he added a little bit extra and said that the advantages of this scheme were only realized in 1962. I think it was before that, in 1961. That is not so bad. It is not the first time either that such a plan was at first not approved by the State, but was, in fact, approved later on. I just want to point out to the hon. member for Newton Park that in the days of the U.P. Government a Minister said the same thing in the Southern Free State. He said that there was simply no money for the Kraaipoort Dam. But certain persons nonetheless eagerly bought land, and a few months later it was actually announced; I am aware of that too.

Sir, in view of the fact that there is so much irrigation in my constituency as a result of the presence of rivers such as the Modder, the Riet, the Vaal and the Orange, I really had hoped to have the opportunity to-day of making some positive contribution here, or at least of hearing something positive, but it is unfortunately the position that so often at the most inopportune time we find a fly in the ointment. I am referring here to the actions of the hon. member for Newton Park and the hon. member for Kensington. I am referring to their actions, not only to-night in the House, but on a previous occasion as well, which to my way of thinking shows that these two hon. members concern themselves with matters which have nothing to do with them at all. To put this matter right, I feel it is my duty in this Committee to-night to say what the real state of affairs is. Hon. members will probably recall that some time ago the hon. member for Kensington put certain questions: here to the Minister in regard to what was; happening in the Orange River area, specifically in the vicinity of Hopetown. The hon. member for Newton Park added a rider to this; and asked in what spirit those consultations; had been conducted, whether it was a pleasant spirit. Sir, that is the sort of thing in which, the hon. member for Kensington takes delight. One really feels quite sad when one thinks that the previous hon. member for Kensington, who sat in a front bench on that side, a man of the highest integrity, and a man whom I have always called a gentleman, and certainly will always call a gentleman, should have as his successor a person such as the hon. member now sitting there.

What do you mean by that?

Just what he says.

Order! I want to warn hon. members on both sides. I am in the Chair, and if an hon. member says something wrong, hon. members may safely leave it to me to call him to order. The hon. member must withdraw those words.

I am deeply disappointed with what the hon. member has done here.

On a point or order, Sir, you asked the hon. member to withdraw those words and he has not done so.

Order! Did the hon. member withdraw, those words?

I continue, Sir …

Order! Did the hon. member withdraw those words? The hon. member must withdarw them.

Would you tell me which words I must withdraw?

The insinuation the hon. member made in respect of the hon. member for Kensington, that he is dishonourable.

I withdraw that. Sir, I just want to put the matter right. Questions were put here to the hon. the Minister with reference to a certain memorandum The questions were asked in respect of matters which have absolutely nothing to do with that hon member. I repeat that if that hon. member did not exhibit this sort of behaviour, he would have acted differently, but he stuck his nose into other people’s affairs, affairs which are no concern of his. I just want to put the facts here. The farmers’ association in question approached me indirectly, through another person. I interviewed them, and on my advice those people drew up a memorandum for submission to the hon. the Minister. On that occasion we agreed that they should do it promptly. I said that I might have the opportunity to speak to the Minister in Pretoria, but actually the understanding was that I would do it while the House was in session here. Sir, I received a memorandum dated 15th June; it was accompanied by a letter dated 18th June, and before the end of June I spoke to the hon. the Minister on the telephone, also in the interests of that association, although I then asked for water, and did not discuss that particular matter except in so far as I told the hon. the Minister that there was a memorandum and mentioned one or two of the main items. But the hon. the Minister told me—and I stressed this—that this matter would be tackled when the House was in session. On 20th July, just after the commencement of the session, I discussed the matter with the hon. the Minister in the Lobby, and he said to me: “This is a matter which is very difficult for us, because it involves so many aspects.” He said further: “I think it may be necessary for us to have an inspection in loco to be able to reply to the memorandum.” I then told the hon. the Minister that I would send him the memorandum in any case, and this was done on 24th July. I understand that it was signed for by the Minister’s office on the 27th. That is what happened.

On the 21st September, i.e. to-day, I received the hon. the Minister’s reply; I have it here in my possession. The matters it deals with are the restrictions which have been imposed, wastage of water where other people have been charged, the allocation of water when the P. K. le Roux Dam has been completed, how much land people will be entitled to irrigate, canal systems, etc. The reply came to-day, and I believe that the time which has elapsed is reasonable, because these are matters which entail a great deal of research work. But at the end of July the members of that same farmers’ association through their executive, and individuals who did not belong to that association, approached me to ask the Minister again if they could not get some water in the meantime because whenever a few cusecs were available, they would like to have it. The hon. the Minister went out of his way and called me to his office and told me that he would make a concession to that area. He told me what the conditions would be, and added that he, in fact, was laying himself open to criticism in these circumstances. I invited the chairman concerned to come to my house on 1st August; I went there and explained the matter to him and to other members of his executive, and apparently they were satisfied. But on the 3rd they telephoned me and said: “The section engineer and the officials are here to grant us that special concession. We just do not see our way clear.” He asked me if he could telephone the hon. the Minister here in the Cape, and I told him that he could do so if he wished. When I returned on the fifth. I was informed that those people would be here for an interview with the hon. the Minister on the seventh. The hon. the Minister asked me to attend that interview, and this I did. The supposition was that that interview would deal specifically with the distribution of this concession water—this temporary concession—but when they arrived here, the chairman of that association did not speak about the allocation of this water; he attacked the hon. the Minister because he had, I might almost say, dared to impose water restrictions in that area. [Time expired.]

Sir, the hon. member for De Aar has dealt with a parochial problem and I am sure that the hon. the Minister will give him the correct answer to his problem. But I hope that the hon. member is not suggesting that when it comes to problems in the country, especially a problem such as the shortage of water, only a Member of Parliament representing a particular constituency can interest himself in the affairs of that constituency. That would be a very wrong attitude.

Sir, I want to deal with another problem. This is a problem which is raised in the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Matters. On page 127 it deals with the subject of the artificial stimulation of rainfall. This is the particular subject that I want to deal with. In South Africa we are not as fortunate as the people in Spain. There is a quotation from “My Fair Lady” which reads “The rain in Spain falls mainly in the plain.”

Now, unfortunately, in South Africa that is not the position because as I can see the problem here it is that the rain falls mainly in Natal or rather along our coast while the main irrigation projects we have, like the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, Lake Mentz and Vaal Hartz Dam are in the platteland, in the plain, where the rainfall is very low. It is this significant feature of our rainfall pattern that perhaps causes our biggest headache in South Africa and it is for this reason that this debate to-day has assumed such important dimensions because we are rapidly reaching the stage where we are using up all the supplies of water available to us. That is why we have had many speeches in this debate dealing with the most beneficial usage of water and its correct uses and I think it is quite right that this should be the case and that we should be concerned at this stage about our water resources because they are definitely running out. It is for this reason that I wish to raise the question of artificially stimulating clouds which very often move over our country without releasing the water they hold. What worries me a little in this report is the final paragraph of the chapter dealing with the artificial stimulation of rainfall where it says—

is a matter which should receive the consideration of the hon. the Minister.

That is at page 129. Now, when one studies reports from other countries, one finds that the artificial stimulation of rain has reached quite an advanced stage, but to the best of my knowledge not much progress has been made in South Africa. I have a magazine here, United States News and World Report, containing some very significant statements in respect of how far the stimulation of rainfall in desert areas has proceeded. It says here—

The article goes on further. I cannot quote the whole of it, but it gives several instances of where the rainfall of this particular desert area had been increased by upwards of 30 per cent.

Then we can turn to another country, Australia. We find that they have an urbanization called the Commonwealth Cloud Physics Laboratory and they state that they have justly claimed in the past that Australia is leading the world in the artificial rain-making business. In the article they go on to quote how the art of rain-making has advanced very considerably in Australia. I have articles here from the United States of America and Russia and they all point to the success which those countries are achieving in the field of artificially stimulating the clouds. We have this tremendous problem in South Africa that we are now using almost all of the available water resources. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to tell us what he has in mind in regard to what the case is going to be in South Africa, in the light of the report where the commission indicates that they feel something more should be done. I would like to know from the hon. the Minister whether he is going to create a special department which will have special moneys voted to it by Parliament and which will take a better look at the possibilities of creating rain in this country and in those areas where water is most urgently needed. As I have said earlier on, we need the water in the plains of the Republic, namely the catchment areas of the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, the Vaal Hartz Dam and Lake Mentz. Those are the areas where we need the precipitation. With the technology at our disposal and when we study what is happening in the other countries, I believe this is a feasible proposition. Not so long ago I saw an example on my own farm of clouds being precipitated by igniting smoke bombs which are placed at strategic points on the ground. They actually caused these clouds to precipitate on the farm whereas these clouds would otherwise have drifted past the farm without releasing a drop of rain.

What will you do if there are no clouds?

Obviously that is a very sensible interjection. That is one of the problems, but the point is that if we precipitate the clouds at strategic points in the years when there are clouds, we are going to increase the rainfall of certain areas very substantially. Where we have invested vast sums of money in great irrigation projects like the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, we can create the precipitation when the clouds are available and impound the water in these dams, many of which are empty during droughts, such as we have had recently. Therefore, I do not think that is really a problem which should deter us. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I want to start by replying to the hon. member for Mossel Bay. He spoke about the Water Year, and I want to thank the hon. member for the contribution he made. I want to tell him that I am pleased that he acknowledged in this House to-night the special contribution made by the Water Year towards giving rise to a general awareness in regard to the water situation in South Africa. I want to say that all of us can be very grateful for the great deal of influence which this promotion campaign of the Water Year has had. As hon. members are aware, the Water Year activities are under the direction of a national committee, which has at its disposal the services of a promotion agency which has rendered service in an exceptional manner and which has, at this stage. seized the imagination of the whole of South Africa. I can tell hon. members that in August we trired to calculate how many people had been reached by means of this campaign, and at that stage it was calculated that the message of the Water Year had already reached 13 million people in South Africa. The idea is to have reached by November of this year 95 per cent of the total population. I can tell the hon. member that 5,600 different organizations have already been integrated with this campaign. I can also tell the hon. member that 16 congresses of a scientific nature have been held on water, and that water is an important theme on the agendas of more than 300 congresses which are of a purely scientific nature. The agricultural unions are co-operating in a wonderful manner. Various other departments have also made special contributions. Various organizations on all levels are making major contributions. Thousands of rands have been donated voluntarily on the part of the private sector so as to make a contribution towards defraying the costs incurred in regard to the Water Year. Schools have also been making their contribution in a special manner. I can tell hon. members that there has been exceptional co-operation on the part of the Provincial Administrations, which requested the Education Departments of the Provinces to co-operate. There are few children who, during this year, have not participated in the Water Year by way of a message, or a lecture, or by way of taking part in some form or other. I think we can say that during this year there has been initiated in this country a promotion programme which has seized the imagination of South Africa such as no promotion programme has to my knowledge ever done in our history. I think I can say this without any fear of contradiction. For that reason I, too, want to express my thanks to the large number of organizations which have co-operated with us and, especially, to the numerous firms which made contributions. I waited for the opportunity to reply to a remark that was made earlier on during this Session, and I am sorry that the hon. member who made it is not here at the moment. I do not want to dwell on this matter, but I just want to refer to it in his absence. I am referring to the hon. member for South Coast who rose in this House earlier on and made a cutting remark in regard to the representations which we had made for contributions to the Water Year by industries.

Are you referring now to the hon. member for South Coast?

No, I am sorry. I am referring to the hon. member for Durban (Point). The hon. member for South Coast made his contribution right from the start. That I know. He also lent his support, and I thank him for having done so. However, the hon. member for Durban (Point) said that to ask the private sector to make a contribution, amounted to begging, for allegedly it was the responsibility of the State to see to it, on their part, that the schemes were constructed, and that such a promotion programme had to be paid for by the State. From the start we adopted the attitude that the State could in fact afford such a programme if it wanted to do so, but that it was not the task of the Government to call people together for the purpose of sitting on pavilions and watching what was happening; it was a programme in which the entire nation had to participate. For that reason a contribution was not only made by the State, but large contributions were also made by the private sector. I thank the large number of firms, as well as the large municipalities, which made contributions for this purpose. I am not only referring to financial contributions now, but also contributions made in many other ways, such as the defrayal of programmes, exhibitions, and so forth. On this occasion I also want to extend my particular thanks to the firm of Van Zyl and Robinson, which was instructed to co-operate in this regard. They have acquitted themselves excellently of their task.

Having said this, I want to come back to a few points which were mentioned here and to which I have not yet replied. One point to which I should like to come back, is the one mentioned by the hon. member for South Coast when he referred to possible co-operation between us and Basutoland. He also referred to the Cabora-Bassa scheme and the northern rivers of South-West Africa. He wanted to know from me what the motive was behind the co-operation, or possible co-operation, if there should be any co-operation. He said it was his attitude and that of his party to look after the interests of our own country, that we should not embark on all sorts of foreign excursions, and that we should work for safety in South Africa and independence from the world outside. I want to tell the hon. member that the reference to the Cabora-Bassa as far as water is concerned, is not of direct importance to South Africa, since we shall not be getting any water from the Cabora-Bassa. If we could obtain cheap power from the Cabora-Bassa—and we shall be able to buy it at a low cost since it will be generated hydro-electrically—we would obtain power which we would otherwise have had to generate in South Africa and for which purpose we would in fact have had to use water. In this sense it helps us and, what is more, we gladly co-operate in such a project which can only benefit both countries. As regards our relations with Lesotho, I may tell the hon. member that our premise is that, if we were to go so far as to enter into an agreement, after the necessary investigations have been made and after it has been proved that there may be advantages in developing water development projects on the plateaux of Lesotho, we shall, in the first instance, look after the interests of South Africa. But in this regard we believe that the interests of South Africa will also be the good interests of our neighbouring states. If we can co-operate with each other in this manner, we shall do so with pleasure. This is an opportunity for co-operation from which both countries can derive benefits. We need the water, as I explained earlier on today. In any case, the capital works will have been disposed of once we have created in that vicinity a catchment basin which will have to serve as a reservoir in which the water is to be stored for South Africa. In other words, it will then be to our advantage to divert the water into such a reservoir from any other source from which we may Obtain it cheaply. Now, if this were to mean that it would come from Lesotho, we would also buy it from Lesotho with pleasure. But an investigation is being carried out into the practicability of this project. It is a lengthy investigation. There are tunnels, canals and dam sites which have to be investigated. This is not an easy task. It takes a great deal of time. We are still waiting for the outcome of this investigation.

I want to come back to the hon. member for Mooi River. He wanted to know here whether we should harness water as a means of conveying refuse in our sewerage systems. Of course, at the moment water is the easiest, cheapest and only known means of conveying refuse. For that reason research is being done everywhere in order to determine whether this can be done by other means. Another cheap and easily workable method for doing this in respect of large numbers of people, has yet to be found. Until such time as another plan has been devised for ourselves or for any other part of the world, we shall have to continue with this method. Investigations are being carried out, not only by us, but also by other countries of the world. We cannot anticipate scientists in their investigations. I grant that, if there were another plan, one ought to follow such a plan.

The hon. member also put a question to me with reference to the works at the Albert Falls Dam. He wanted to know when we thought a start could be made with this project. We hope that this will happen next year. He also wanted to know when the expropriation in regard to the Spioenkop Dam would take place.

†The hon. member will know that the expropriation is being done by the Department of Land Tenure. But we hope it will be finalized before a dam is completed.

*The hon. member also put a question in regard to the catchment areas of the Katkloof and the Umyamvubu Rivers which we declared to be water control areas. He wanted to know whether I was going to exercise the control in my capacity as Minister of Forestry or Minister of Water Affairs. It stands to reason that legislation still has to be introduced by the Department of Water Affairs by way of supplementing the major project in which the Departments of Forestry and Water Affairs are both participating. For the sake of more effective control over the catchment areas, the Department of Water Affairs will also have to introduce further legislation in this regard. If this is done, it will be done by the Department of Water Affairs, But, as hon. members heard, it will be under the supervision of the Department of Forestry.

I also want to refer to the speech made by the hon. member for Moorreesburg. The hon. member referred to the Vogelvlei Dam. He said the Vogelvlei Dam was the obvious dam to be enlarged so that it might store more of the reserve water of the Boland. I agree with him. The intention is that the Vogelvlei Dam will now, for a very long time, have to store the supply which has been allocated to it—in other words, the water which will be diverted into it from the Little Berg River and from the Twenty-four Rivers. It will not be easy for us to enlarge the Vogelvlei Dam much more, for it is obvious that the canal will not be able to convey the water to the dam, as the water would be at too high a level and flow back into the canals. However, it can still be raised slightly. I want to tell the hon. member that eventually the Vogelvlei Dam will also have to serve as the spillway for any water which may spill over from the Berg River, when it flows down the system. The hon. member also referred to the Misverstand Dam, and he wanted to know what would happen to it. I want to tell the hon. member that I stand by what I said previously, i.e. that the Misverstand Dam is an essential dam which will eventually have to be constructed within the framework of the development of the master scheme. It will form the last storage point of the water of the Berg River. The hon. member is correct in saying that the Misverstand Dam will probably have a pollution problem, because the fertilizer used in that vicinity drains into the dam. That is true. We are looking into the situation, and we think that in the meantime we shall be able to devise plans to surmount this problem. I am not prepared to make any further comment on this matter, but attention is being paid to it at present. I do not think this will be an obstruction to the eventual construction of the dam.

The hon. member asked a question on the dam in the mountains near Tulbagh. There is a possibility of building a dam in the mountains near Tulbagh, but that would mean that water would have to be pumped to that dam. We cannot simply build a dam either. In order to determine what a dam is going to cost, we must first of all, make the necessary calculations and do the planning and designing. When the master-plan has been completed, it will have to be decided whether it is still necessary to build it. I think the hon. member will be satisfied if we say that, since the Boland has few dam basins, we shall have to utilize every available dam basin. I think it is important to know this.

Then the hon. member said that my predecessor had indicated that no more water would be tapped from the Twenty-four Rivers until provision had been made for development further down. That is true. We are engaged in that development. The hon. member need not be afraid that we shall divert all the water from the Twenty-four Rivers without having any regard to the development lower down. It stands to reason that regard will be had to this matter. The people have a right to this, and proper attention will therefore be paid to it.

The hon. member for Orange Grove made a speech here this afternoon in which he adopted a reproachful tone towards the Department, as though the Department of Water Affairs had over the years failed to …

The Minister, not the Department.

Well then, that the Minister and the National Party had failed to do the necessary planning. He suggested that it was actually the Department of Water Affairs which was suffering because the necessary had not been done, and that the existing shortages were actually our fault. I want to tell the hon. member that any Government can make provision for normal drought conditions, but no Government can make provision for exceptional circumstances, such as we have had now. I want to point out to the hon. member that the drought of 1968 was much worse in the Vaal area than any drought we had had before that time. It could therefore not be foreseen that it would assume these proportions, just as little as we could have foreseen that even in the Boland a situation would develop in the way it has in fact done. That is why the Department of Water Affairs is geared for—and it is also our policy to do so—planning ahead, even for foreseeing the exceptional situation and making provision for it. The hon. member, as well as other hon. members, said that the Department of Water Affairs had not done what was necessary, because the Government had failed to do these things. But the United Party were in power for 29 years. Why did they not do these things during that period? Does that hon. member know that in this year’s Estimates provision is being made for more money to be spent in one year’s time than was spent by that party in 29 years’ time? I want to tell that hon. member that this year we are working simultaneously on schemes whereby three times as much water will be stored as could be stored by his Government in 29 years’ time. Therefore, we should not level reproaches at one another. I want to tell the hon. member that I have no intention of conducting this debate on the level of “what did you do and what did we do”. If that hon. members wants to level such reproaches, I can also ask him why they failed to do anything during all those years. Everything which had to be done over the past 20 years in order to lay a foundation on which we could build, was done over these past 20 years. I am referring here to the hydrological division which was developed over the past number of years. Over the past number of years we had to work on an Act, an Act which is an outcome of an instruction given by the late Adv. Strijdom. It is the Water Act, in terms of which water control in South Africa is regulated. Those foundations have been laid. A large number of water region schemes all over the country have been established over the past number of years. We are engaged in establishing new water region schemes. I also want to tell the hon. member that over the past number of years there has been an exchange of knowledge between South Africa and other countries. I can also mention to him that the National Institute for Water Research was established during the past number of years. It was an achievement by the latter body which led to the break-through in Windhoek. The fact that we are at present leading the world in this sphere, was rendered possible over the past number of years and not during the régime of that hon. member’s party. We have the cooperation of many universities, each of which is doing research in its own field, and more and more chairs have been established. Research has also been done by this Government. The hon. member ought to know this. He ought not to level reproaches here.

I mentioned these things as long ago as 1965.

All these things could have been done before that time. Why were they not done before 1948? All of them were done after that time. The major development schemes, such as the one on the Makatini Flats and the Orange River scheme, were announced after 1948.

Now, the hon. member for Newton Park also made a speech in which he indicated that in 1959 my hon. predecessor had made a speech in which he reportedly said that we did not know where the water was to come from and that it could also come from other sources. The then hon. Minister was, of course, as right as could be when he said that. He had to say it. What else should he have said? At that stage we had been investigating this matter for years. While the hon. the Minister was speaking at the time, the Department was working on the preparation of a scheme. The hon. member ought to know that the preparation of such a scheme takes years. At the first opportunity that offered itself, when the information became known and the necessary planning could be done, the scheme was announced.

The Conroy scheme.

Now the hon. member refers to the Conroy scheme. The hon. member should be so kind as to take the trouble to go back and to see what it comprised at the time. The Orange project in which we are engaged at the moment, is a gigantic project which virtually links up two oceans with each other and which is much more extensive in scope at present than was anticipated at that stage. However, I want to concede that before this time it is unlikely that any Government was financially in a position to launch a project such as the Orange project. The United Party would not have been able to undertake it, even if it had wanted to do so. This Government, too, would not have been able to do it at that stage, for it was too extensive in scope. After all, there is some connection between the capital investment on the part of the State and the gross national product. It was only when South Africa had become strong and big enough to finance such a project, that we could launch it. We could not launch it before that time. Therefore, we should be fair as far as this matter is concerned. I want to tell the hon. member that the Orange project, as we designed it, is in fact an example of a major scheme embodying the principle which the hon. member for South Coast mentioned when he referred to “apportionment”, where a certain percentage is set aside for agricultural purposes, a certain percentage for possible expansion in the event of mining development taking place in the future, and a certain percentage for industrial development. The first part which I myself had caused to be set aside for the purposes of industrial development, when I became Minister, out of that total quantity of water, came to 400,000 morgen feet. After further calculations we found that we would be able to increase this to 600,000 morgen feet in order to keep a tremendous reserve for eventual development in the future. Therefore, I am telling the hon. member that it will be of no use to us to say to each other, to and fro across the floor of the House, “Why did you not do it at that stage?” or “Why did you do it at that stage?” Where would this take us? The fact remains that at that stage it would not have been possible for the United Party Government to build the Orange River scheme, for the country could simply not afford it. In fact, up to 1960 South Africa’s economy simply could not afford it; it was only after that that it was possible for our country to do so.

Sir, I want to refer to the hon. member for Kensington. To-night he tried to extract poison from a visit I had received during the recent drought from people living along the Orange River. If I misunderstood him, I apologize, but this was my impression. The hon. member put certain questions to me here, and I saw at once what the questions were driving at, and was correct. At a later stage he rose in order to make use of those questions. What has happened now? When the drought struck, we, along with the rest of the country, really found ourselves in the position that we did not always know what to do, for in such a case one really finds oneself in a situation where the need is great and where one does not know when the first rains will come. Because one is not a prophet, one is not always in a position to know what concessions one may make. At the time the people came to me. I do not want to go into the question of the memorandum which was sent to me, when they sent that memorandum to me, and when they received a reply, etc. The fact simply remains that the people living along that part of the river, wanted to know what their rights were. They wanted a forecast as to when it would be possible to determine their total rights under the Orange River scheme. At that stage they also asked various other questions in regard to water concessions.

Sir, this is not something which one can work out while sitting in an office. There are hundreds of miles of riparian land, and investigations have to be carried out for a long time. Engineers have to go there to gauge the water, and calculations have to be made. Every farm has to be visited in order to see what the farmer requires. We have to ascertain which farmers have stock which will die and which farmers have trees which will have to be kept alive. It takes weeks to carry out such an investigation. In the meantime I received the deputation here. They came here and asked me whether it would be possible for us to give them more water. It stands to reason that we cannot give people more water when there is no water.

Now the hon. member for Kensington wants to know from me why we can tell some people living along a certain part of a river that they may abstract water, whereas we are telling other people living along another part of the river that they may not abstract any water. Sir, when a person knows nothing about a river and about water, he asks such a question! Take a river which is 1,000 miles in length and in which the water-flow is becoming weak. Does the hon. member know what the flow property of a river is? When the flow in a river becomes weak, that river starts drying up from the mouth, not from the source; and what happened here, was that the river had already stopped flowing over a long distance; in another part it only had a slight flow so that we could only give drinking-water for stock-watering purposes. In another part the flow was still so strong that we could allow abstraction to take place until the flow had declined completely. In other words, in some places people no longer had anything at all; a little higher up they could at least keep their stock alive, and still higher up we could allow them to abstract water for irrigation purposes. Now the hon. member wants to know from me why everybody is not treated alike; why some people are allowed to abstract and others are not. The answer is that the river does not have an equally strong flow everywhere; this is what happened there. I want to tell the hon. member that there was no ulterior motive.

When the hon. member for De Aar approached me and told me that these people were really in distress, I instructed the Department to make calculations again to see whether we could not in fact make a special concession. The Department told me that if we did that, we would be taking a very great risk, for supposing the rains did not come early and we had made this concession and the water stopped flowing at Prieska, what reproaches would not be levelled at us then? In spite of that I did take the chance and made a small concession whereby the riparian owners were allowed to water their trees. Then the hon. member approached me, and the one person who walked out of my office because he could not have his own way, went to these hon. members in order to complain.

But now I want to say here in this House that this particular person to whom the hon. member referred, did not speak about the area; he only spoke about himself. He made representations to me for exceptions to be made in his case so that he might water all his peach trees, for he said that if they were not watered and there were frost, their blossoms would be killed. But I can say that the other members of the deputation were satisfied. They were interested in the community, whereas this man was only interested in himself. I also want to tell the hon. member that the flow was very low. Fortunately it did rain a little in the meantime, and fortunately it was possible for us soon after that to afford everybody the opportunity of giving their trees some water. After that it rained again, and for a few months the situation was solved. This happens to rivers over the years. The hon. member should therefore not gain from that the impression that the people of my Department do not know what they are doing.

Water administration is a very important thing. What is more, these people did have a hard time, but we try to help everybody as far as we can. The hon. member also observed that we should have compensated these people; he wanted us to have compensated those people who could not come. We do not adopt the attitude in South Africa that, if a river has very little water or stop flowing, it is the duty of the State to compensate people because it is getting dry. Surely, it is not the duty of the State to do this. There has only been one instance in which the State has compensated people, i.e. in the case of the Vaalhartz. These people had a quota which was theirs, and this was bought up and distributed amongst the industries, and because water had been taken from them, they were compensated on a basis which was worked out by the Department. But this is a settlement. In the case of the Orange River, as is the case with all other rivers, it is not the State’s responsibility to compensate people for their losses because it is getting dry, or for the costs they incurred.

The hon. member also remarked that I was very self-assured or self-satisfied about the staff position in the Department and also in regard to the posts which had not been filled. But this is not a question of self-satisfaction. I can tell the hon. member that we are satisfied about the fact that over the past few months and, in fact, over the past two years, there has been an increase in the number of officials. In contrast with many other cases of which we know, even in the private sector, there are a number of engineers who previously worked in the Department of Water Affairs and who have now returned to the Department. In addition, quite a number of people from the private sector joined our staff. Hence the fact that we were in a position to develop our planning division into what it is to-day and to undertake works which we could not undertake before. We are also satisfied with the interest shown on the part of persons who have taken up bursaries awarded by the Department of Water Affairs and who are studying at universities at present. We are also satisfied about the fact that we have had good service from the Czechs who came out.

I may just mention that in the evenings officials of the Department helped these people by teaching them English and Afrikaans, by making them feel at home and by making them useful to the Department. Officials of the Department did this free of charge in order to make them feel at home, and I think we may be grateful for officials who have such loyalty to their Department as to make this contribution. We are satisfied. This is not being done at a fast rate, for after all is said and done there are not many engineers available, but I believe that if over the next few years our posts are supplemented in the way they have been over the past year, we shall gradually surmount our problems, because if we can sustain this growth rate, we shall slowly but surely reach the position where we can do what we would like to do in South Africa as far as water is concerned. Therefore, we are not self-assured; but we are grateful for what we have.

The hon. member for Benoni referred to priorities, and he mentioned mining development and said that it was being restricted, and he mentioned by name Sishen and Uis where people were tapping subterranean sources, and said that the subterranean sources were giving out and that another plan had to be devised. The hon. member said there was not sufficient advance planning to meet the situation. But now I want to know from the hon. member how one can, with the best will in the world, know where deposits are going to be discovered and development is going to take place. This is the one thing one does not know, and if diamonds were discovered at a certain place, water would be demanded the next day. We can do this as far as industrial expansion and the establishment of townships are concerned, but we can, after all, not foresee mineral discoveries, and therefore it is not fair to expect us to keep up all the time.

But let me tell the hon. member that up to now we have not in one single instance held up mining development unnecessarily for a long time before catching up as regards supplying water. I want to mention the case of the environs of Sishen. The hon. member knows about the scheme which has been undertaken there. We constructed pipelines in order to have water available, and I want to tell the hon. member that in regard to the copper deposits which have now been discovered near Prieska, we have already conducted the necessary negotiations with the companies concerned on the basis that we shall supply water there within a year or two.

I want to mention the case of Springbok. Springbok and its environs did in fact have water in the old basin of the Buffels River, where the water was stored far below the surface. The area drew on these reserves until, because of the low rainfall, these reserves started to give out and the State stepped in immediately, and if he were to look at the Estimates now, he would see that an amount of R6 million has been appropriated, and this amount of R6 million will have to be spent within two years’ time on bringing water to that area.

As far as mining development in South Africa is concerned, we can say that it has been possible for such development to take place because the Department of Water Affairs has always been at hand to grant timely assistance in order that such development may not be impeded, and this also applies to many of the developments in South-West Africa, where many difficulties are being experienced as South-West Africa does not have much water. To supply water there, sometimes costs phenomenal amounts and, what is more, this is going to happen, for at present South-West Africa is on the eve of development, but we shall try to keep pace. To my mind it amounts to levelling an unfair reproach to say that mining development cannot always get water in time, for this is the only type of development which relies on a discovery and gives no prior warning as to where it is going to take place.

The hon. member also referred to over-irrigation, and said that research had to be done. A great deal of research is being done in regard to irrigation. If he had attended the interesting exhibition which was run by the Department of Agricultural Technical Services in Pretoria for a few days, he would have seen that advanced irrigation apparatus was exhibited and that some of the best techniques in the world were demonstrated there, which proves that we are absolutely up to date with what is happening in the rest of the world in all sort of new fields. But it is not our fault if the irrigators themselves do not follow up in time and, in addition, fail to make use of the modem apparatus. I want to assure him that as far as this research is concerned, we know what is happening in other countries, and what we ourselves are doing in South Africa, is up to date. It is unnecessary for any irrigator in South Africa to do something wrong and to think that the right advice is not available. Good advice is available.

The hon. member also referred to the uncontrolled agricultural development along the Lower Vaal. Now, I just want to tell the hon. member that if he goes back into the history of the development of the Lower Vaal, he will find that order was created when this Government stepped in so as to create order out of the prevailing chaos. Do hon. members know when this chaos developed? It developed between 1934 and 1948. It was only from 1948 onwards, when the Water Act was implemented, and when it was possible for us to start issuing permits, that order was introduced in that area. I want to tell the hon. member that there was a period when there was no orderliness in water development. Many people settled on the banks of rivers and exceeded their abstraction quotas, the result being that later on it was necessary to take action and to bring them back to their rightful abstraction rights. To determine these rights, is a major task in itself. Therefore I think it is unfair to refer to the Lower Vaal as though this lack of orderliness has developed since 1948. The records for substantiating the fact that this premise is wrong, are available. The hon. member may consult them, and if I am wrong he can tell me what the facts are next time he rises to speak here. He will find that the disorderliness developed between 1934 and 1948.

The hon. member for Newton Park referred to negligence which had allegedly occurred, and he referred to what the hon. member for Moorreesburg was supposed to have said. What did the hon. member for Moorreesburg say? I do not know, because I have not read his speech yet. From what the hon. member for Newton Park said, I can deduce what the hon. member for Moorreesburg said, and if what he said is correct, then the hon. member for Moorreesburg is quite correct. What did the hon. member for Moorreesburg say, according to the hon. member for Newton Park? He said that water from the Orange River would be taken to the Karoo towns in an attempt to create beauty spots.

Fifty to sixty Karoo towns.

What happened after the planning of the Orange River project had started? It was envisaged that this river would give a lease of life to Karoo towns as far as possible, but that the necessary planning and investigation would first have to take place, because suitable land was not available everywhere. A great deal of progress has already been made in that respect; attention has been given for years. So much progress has already been made that I can now tell this House that areas which were originally envisaged as areas which would fee developed under the Orange River scheme, cannot be developed further, because the soil surveys indicate that the soils layers rest on a highly mineralized subsoil and that it will cause the soil to become brack, as it did in other parts of the world and also in other parts of South Africa. In other words, not what we want to do, but what circumstances permit us to do, will be done. If the hon. member for Moorreesburg envisaged this, he was quite correct in doing so. When we started, we ourselves wondered what heights the Orange River scheme would reach. What was eventually to determine this, is not what we wanted to do, but what circumstances will permit and where the soil is available; in other words, where good soil was available to a sufficient extent. This is what has happened. In this process we are finding soil which we did not know existed. In other parts again, there is soil which we believed to be good, but which was proved not to be good. This applies especially to the area at Carnarvon and the Sak River. It is a brack area and we ourselves were disappointed at its being brack, but that is the position. Soil surveys indicated to us that it would be extremely dangerous to take water there. The brack problem there is so serious that the area there would develop into salt pans within two or three years. The hon. member asked me whether I wanted to say something about this matter. What I want to say about it, is the following. I want to say that during the past year or two, we have fortunately made a great deal of progress in connection with these soil surveys. We have not yet completed them, but so far the surveys have indicated that a very large part of the land situated on the southern bank of the Orange River in the vicinity of the Sak River and Carnarvon, simply cannot be irrigated, although initially this seemed to be the case. Furthermore, these surveys showed that large tracts of land which we did not think of originally, have in become available. Land is being sought in the triangle which is formed between the Vaal and the Orange Rivers near to Douglas and in the vicinity of Kimberley. I would be in a better position to point out the area if I had a map. We shall probably obtain large tracts of land there, but unfortunately it is the position that after intensive investigations, the local conditions will determine where the water must fee taken. However, I want to tell the hon. member that the planning in connection with the provision of the water …

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Is all this additional development possible, along with the original three phases which were planned?

No. The only thing the Department has approved, is the first phase. However, a second, a third and further phases were envisaged. They were, however, not approved. It was envisaged that the matter be investigated properly. Hon. members should not be under the impression that the further phases which have not been approved, were planned in this way. It is merely an indication of what we are striving for. This is why I am saying to the hon. member that we shall irrigate at some places which were not indicated originally, but certain places which were indicated originally, will not fee irrigated. In other words, we must undertake planning and also make the necessary soil surveys. I think that after this explanation the hon. member will be satisfied as regards the development along the Orange River.

Yes.

I now want to refer to what the hon. member for De Aar said. The hon. member for De Aar was correct when he said that he was dealing with the other hon. member and that I did not want to interfere.

Observations were made by several hon. members in connection with research in regard to the desalination of water and the abstraction of water from the air. The hon. member was the last one to talk about these matters. I want to say to the hon. members who spoke about these matters that, if there is a field in which South Africa has been making tremendous progress and major breakthroughs, I believe it is in connection with research in regard to the abstraction of water from the air. A great deal is being done in this connection.

† I can tell the hon. member for Walmer that a great deal of scientific research has been done in this field. The hon. member knows what is done in the rest of the world and especially in America. I have been told by the Secretary for Water Affairs that we have received the latest research reports on what the Americans are doing in this regard.

*I may tell hon. members that of the moisture which moves over our sub-continent, only 5 per cent precipitates in the form of rain or snow. 95 per cent of the moisture moves past. In other words, there is a large source of water in our air. The old method of abstraction actually consisted of strewing the air with some or other chemical which can extract water from the air in small drops. However, we are considering various other methods and we have already progressed far in this respect. I can say to hon. members that we have already progressed far with research in the Eastern Transvaal. Attempts are being made to extract moisture from the air by means of the erection of screens. Thus far the indications are reasonably promising. These are small screens which the clouds come up against and which then cause condensation, so that the water drips down. I do not want to anticipate research results. I myself have no scientific training in this field. However, I am watching developments as the responsible Minister and I am very interested in the matter. I was very deeply impressed by what can be done in this connection and what is in fact being done. I have been told—we are engaged in this now—that by the electrification of the screens, it is possible to increase the precipitation fivefold. I do not know. We are investigating it. Research is also being done which will take these results further. We are hoping that we can make considerable improvements in this regard. In addition, there are many other directions, for example the abstraction of water from the air by means of hydroscopic material, the tapping of the water and the re-utilization of the material itself. I want to say to the hon. member that there are certain parts of our country along the West Coast where the humidity is much higher than in the high rainfall areas themselves. The humidity along the West Coast is very high. The clouds are not visible, but the humidity is there. The question is how to abstract it. We believe that there are great possibilities here. A great deal of money is being spent. We are co-operating with various authorities. The C.S.I.R. is doing research in that respect. The hydrological section of the Department of Water Affairs is itself attending to the matter. We shall spend considerably more in the future. That is why I said this afternoon that we shall seek the co-operation of various bodies. These bodies are the C.S.I.R., the Weather Bureau, universities, other bodies abroad and whoever wants to cooperate. That is why I think it is so important that we should do what I said this afternoon, namely that we should direct all this research through a water research commission—I shall come back to this House in that connection— which can co-ordinate research, because I believe that much is going to come from this field of research.

I may also say that, although we cannot announce at this stage that we have made a great breakthrough in respect of the desalination of sea water, really significant results have been achieved. We are doing more than hon. members may realize. We are doing research in the desert areas of South-West Africa in order to obtain water on a small scale locally by means of sun distillation. We have made a considerable breakthrough. It is true that it is on a small scale, but it has been done. In this way we are doing research in various fields. We should therefore like to co-ordinate this research and have it led by a commission which will concentrate on it. I shall come back to the House later to report on the progress we have made and what further action we intend taking. In other words, in connection with the research to abstract water either from the sea or from the air, much progress has been made as far as South Africa is concerned. Our country has not lagged behind as far as this is concerned. We are right out in front. Furthermore, South Africa, and not overseas countries, made the breakthrough in reclaiming sewage water. It was not the Americans, but we. We are leading the world in this regard. As regards other results too, we are among the countries which have made the most progress. We are also invited to the international conferences. I want to say to hon. members that the officials who are taking the lead here, are inspired persons. We have very good contact with what other countries are doing in this connection. I am therefore satisfied that the necessary attention is being given to research. In addition, I am grateful to be able to say this evening that we have harnessed the universities of South Africa and have got them to participate in this research. Hon. members know about the chair which we established at the University of Pretoria in respect of the technique of water utilization. The University of Cape Town is co-operating in an exceptional way in regard to sanitary engineering. The University of Stellenbosch is co-operating in respect of marine and irrigation engineering. The University of the Witwatersrand is co-operating in connection with hydrology and hydrologics. I therefore think that hon. members can be satisfied that we are already doing what can be done in this respect with the few people at our disposal.

Mr. Chairman, I think this is all to which I still had to reply. If there is something which has slipped my memory, I shall try to remember it when I rise again.

Mr. Chairman, this evening I do not want to discuss the profound significance of water in the broad sense of the word and how it affects the economy of our country. This has already been done in a conclusive way. I want to simplify the significance of water to its appreciation and control in its most minute form, namely the raindrop and everything which it embraces. Quite rightly the Commission of Inquiry into Water Matters dealt with the run-off of rainwater into our rivers in the very first column of its report. Their figures prove to me what profound influence is exercized by accumulated raindrops and what profound consequences they eventually have. It is said that the average run-off to our rivers represents 20 million morgen feet a year or 31,500 million gallons a day. Of this total run-off, approximately 40 per cent, i.e. 12,600 million gallons a day, can be conserved. It is stated in this report that the quantity of water which is conserved can be increased to 50 per cent, or 15,700 million gallons a day. All of this will consist of surface water or run-off and it can be done by means of controlling the run-off of excess rainwater, i.e. the accumulated drops. From natural sources and subterranean sources, 680 million gallons a day are already being obtained. According to the report, this can be increased to 10.5 million morgen feet a year, or 16,500 million gallons a day. It has been calculated that the total quantity of water which can be available by the year 2000, will be 32,200 million gallons a day. If we accept that this subterranean water and the natural sources are also fed from one common source, namely raindrops from the clouds, which fall down in a multitude and flow away to provide 15,700 million gallons a day to our rivers and storage dams, while 16,500 million gallons a day sink into the earth and are conserved underground for profitable use, then it is clear that the raindrop is the real source and the basis of all our surface water and subterranean water.

The raindrop may be described and lauded as the nucleus, the core, the soul of all lofe on earth, the pivot on which all life on earth hinges. If I were a poet, I would have wanted to write a poem to describe the significance and value of the raindrop. Perhaps the significance of the raindrop can best be illustrated by the almost astronomical force which can be generated by the momentum of raindrops. It has been calculated that a storm of average intensity releases power at the same rate the drops contained in 2 inches of rain per hour on one acre of land have the same release of power as six tractors of 40 horsepower. To me this power symbolizes the value and the significance of the raindrops which sift down in three to eight days of penetrating rain and penetrate down in order to supplement the subterranean waters, or even fall down to the earth in a devastating cloudburst and fill our dams and which will eventually always keep the whole Orange River complex full, all for the good and life of plant, animal and man, and furthermore for the exploitation of developing countries such as our own fatherland. This is indispensable for irrigation, drinking water for stock, human consumption, industrial and urban development, etc.

This brings one to the basis of protection and conservation on which all our planning should be directed towards protecting our water sources. The most important is the soil on which the drops fall. Under normal circumstances and in nature unspoilt a high degree of balance is maintained between the soil erosive and the soil protective elements. The impact of a raindrop is the first basic cause of soil erosion and the consequent silt formation which threatens storage dams and washes away good soil to the sea. Natural vegetation is the only neutralizing factor which maintains the balance between penetration into the soil and run-off. The raindrop which strikes the naked earth closes the pores and prevents the penetration of moisture by leading to the formation of a crust. This promotes a too rapid run-off and results in soil erosion and the silting up of dams. Good rains falling on a well-covered surface produce a balanced run-off with little silt and promote a constant, even run-off of a perfectly clear stream of water, even with excessive rains. This is the ideal and the natural situation. We should strive to maintain this, not only in the interests of soil conservation, but also in the interests of water conservation.

Therefore our water conservation techniques must be focussed on and redirected to the central core, namely the raindrop and everything which it means and contains. Its value must be analysed and determined. Its control and use must take the first and last place in all our planning. It is the raindrop which stimulates vegetation, causes the rivers and the springs to flow, is the reason for the windmills turning on the plains of the Karoo, fills the storage dams and thus turns the wheels of the mighty industries in our country. Do we have enough appreciation for the raindrops which fall on the roofs and on the tarred streets in our densely populated urban complexes? How many millions of gallons can be conserved daily by means of planned catchment systems for the water from the roofs and the streets? Raindrops on the roofs and in the streets are wasted in densely populated urban complexes. If this water can be conserved in an organized and planned way, it can be utilized to supplement the urban supplies. Such a system will cost less than the purification installations, which must be established at high cost. I think time and study should be devoted to ways and means of conserving this run-off which goes to waste. In my opinion, the raindrops which fall here in Cape Town in a single season, and which flow away unutilized, can be directed along pipelines and underground canals to central points where they can be conserved. I believe that one square hectare, or as we always said, one square mile of land, covered by roofs and tarred roads can make ten times more run-off water available without the problem of erosion and wash-aways than a square mile of a natural catchment area can. This may seem ridiculous to some hon. members, but this is true. [Time expired.]

[No quorum.]

Mr. Chairman, I was interested in the hon. the Minister’s opening remarks this afternoon when he dealt with the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Water Matters. I found his remarks very interesting because we on this side of the House are at one with the remarks of the hon. the Minister in regard to this particular report. I do believe that if we who are interested in water affairs can carry out only half of what is mentioned in this report by the turn of the century, everybody in this country will benefit tremendously. This report illustrates to us how we should strive to achieve efficient utilization of our water resources; in other words, to preserve a balance between supply and demand. Of course, Sir, we realize that much more research still has to be done in regard to water, but we can only do as much as our financial resources will allow. [Interjections.] Sir, it is strange to me that hon. members seem to be more interested in my Chief Whip than the subject we are debating here. I find that somehow there is a lack of interest in water affairs here to-night.

A most important subject.

It is indeed one of the most important subjects that this House has discussed during this session, and yet when my hon. Chief Whip walks in here everybody looks at him.

I have listened with interest all day to speeches made by members on both sides of the House. We have heard various problems discussed here in connection with water an airs, such as evaporation for instance. I think we will all agree that evaporation in South Africa is a very serious problem; it is an immense problem because of the hot sun that we enjoy here and the berg winds which frequently blow across the country. Then we have the problem of water pollution. I submit that one finds water pollution all over the world but in this country in particular, where we are so short of water, where we have so little water at our disposal, we cannot afford to pollute the water. This problem was discussed too. Then, last but not least, hon. members discussed what I believe is a very important matter, i.e. the silt content of most of our streams and rivers; in other words, the sediment loads which our rivers carry when in flow. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet spoke about the silt content of the Van Rynevelds Pass Dam in the Graaff-Reinet constituency and I found his speech very interesting. Silt is indeed a great problem, and this is what I want to discuss in the limited time at my disposal to-night. Sir, we discussed the whole Orange River scheme here this afternoon. We know that it is being built in stages. The Hendrik Verwoerd Dam has already become a reality; it has already become a dam; in other words, it has already started to conserve water and to dam up the flow of the great Orange River. This dam which is nearing completion is costing some R35 million. Then we have in the first stage of construction what I consider to be a mighty project, something which I have been watching ever since it started because I am particularly interested in that area, that is to say, the Cape Midlands and the North Eastern Cape, the Orange River and the Sundays River and the Fish River valleys. The projects to which I refer is the tunnel which leads from the Venterstad district into the Steynsburg district. This tunnel happens to be 51 miles in length. It happens to pass underneath one of our great water sheds in South Africa, a defined water shed between the waters flowing into the Indian and Atlantic oceans. Sir, it is significant perhaps I should say that it is a coincidence, that where this tunnel is being built beneath the water shed, that particular area should be one of the most eroded areas in South Africa. I am thinking of the Bulhoek farm which is famous for many reasons. That particular farm Bulhoek in the Steynsburg district is one of the most eroded areas that I know of in South Africa. This tunnel passes underneath it, over a distance of 51½ miles from Oviston to Theebus. The inlet is at Oviston, on the Venterstad side, and the outlet is at Theebus, running into the Theebus River which flows into the Grassridge irrigation dam. The diameter of this tunnel is 17½ feet. In other words, if three men stand on each other’s shoulders, the top man’s head will not touch the ceiling of the tunnel, that is to say, when it is completely lined with cement and concrete. Sir, this is my point and I am pleased that the hon. the Minister is listening. I am not only speaking for myself but on behalf of many people who have approached me. The Department of Water Affairs is taking this solid rock, this granite from the tunnel, by conveyer belt and dumping it in huge dumns which will cover large areas of land on the surface above the tunnel. This rock is being conveyed from seven vertical shafts—(I do not want to mention all the other shafts)— and dumped on the surface, thus forming dumps in the same way as the mine dumps have been formed on the gold mines. I want to know whether it is not possible for the Department of Water Affairs and Irrigation, together with the Department of Technical Services, to take that rock and to dump or it need be to build it into all the eroded areas covering the tunnel. We know that in Cape Town the municipality has succeeded in pushing the sea back and building the Foreshore out of waste. There was a time when people did not believe that this was possible. Sir, I do not believe that this is impracticable; I believe I am making a practical suggestion, and it does not only come from me but from many people living in that area. I believe that with 51½ miles of rock … with a diameter of 51½ feet we could fill in almost 51½ miles of sloots. Sir, I do not care which Department actually does this. I am putting this to the hon. the Minister for his serious consideration. I believe that if we can do this, it will assist us in arresting the erosion there, which is causing this silt which is running into the dams which the hon. the Minister mentioned in reply to a question which I put to him recently on the silt content of the Orange River. He quoted as examples the dry silt content of Grasridge, Lake Arthur, Van Rynevelds Pass Dam, and so forth. The erosion in this area is the cause of the silt running into those particular irrigation dams. Not only will this assist us to arrest erosion there but it will also have a wonderful psychological effect on tourists visiting that area. If people who come from overseas visit this area and see that we South Africans are putting this waste rock to such good use, it will create a wonderful impression not only on them, but on all the people in the area, particularly the farmers who would give anything to have that waste rock placed in sloots caused by erosion and which is creating concern in that particular area. [Time expired.]

Sir, this evening and the entire day we have been dealing here with probably the most important factor of any people’s continued existence, i.e. water. You will allow me, Sir, to thank the hon. the Minister as well as his officials for this wonderful, clear and well-considered report they have Tabled, as well as for the report of the commission of inquiry. We also have to thank the Department, the Minister and the Government for being able to celebrate our Water Year this year. Previous speakers have spoken about this and the hon. the Minister has replied, but I, too, just want to thank him, because in the history of this people the time has arrived for us to call a halt and ask ourselves what we are going to do with the water we have and what we can do without water. Sir, water is one of the most important necessities on this earth, or on this planet. We read in Genesis One that there were in fact water and land, but that God separated the two from each other. The Creator made everything, but water and land were there. The portfolio of water is probably one of the most difficult portfolios to hold in a country such as South Africa. Everybody wants water. If it rains too much, people complain, and if it rains too little, they also complain. We can, as the hon. the Minister said, reproach one another, but this will not help us. Steps should be taken, and active steps at that, to ensure the continued existence of the people of this Republic and to prevent us from perishing as a result of a shortage of water. Sir, if one traces history, one finds that the rainfall is more or less the same every year. One year it is a little more and the next it is a little less. But what man does not take into consideration, is that the population of the world, and consequently the population of this country as well, is increasing all the time. Our problem is that we have limited water resources while our population is growing. Therefore one continually hears pleas that steps should be taken against the pollution of water, and rightly so, because our population is increasing and the demand for fresh water keeps on growing. Therefore pleas are being made for the building of dams. Every member of Parliament pleads here for certain privileges for his constituency, and almost every one sitting here probably has a word of thanks in his heart for the Department of Water Affairs for what has already been achieved in his constituency. Sir, I am one of the people who may thank the Department of Water Affairs and the Minister for their aid and assistance in my constituency. But in this way we are pleading for more dams. Everyone would like to see a dam built in his constituency. However, the task rests on the shoulders of the Department and its technicians and engineers to work out whether the planning of a dam in such a constituency is feasible and whether the building of that dam will be profitable. In this way we have also heard representations coming from this wonderful part of our country, the Boland, which has been stricken by a severe drought but, wherever one drives now, the rivers and dams are full again. In this way we believe that the dams and the rivers will become full again and that the Hendrik Verwoerd Dam, that fine scheme, will also overflow one day. For if a people loses its faith and does not believe in the future anymore, it will perish. I believe, however, that both sides of this House have faith that it will rain again and that the dams will be filled. This is security for the future.

Therefore I am so grateful for these messages which have been reaching the people in this Water Year, messages which are now reaching the child from an early age, which are reaching the adult and which are reaching every citizen and every race because of this fine idea of the Water Year, because we, as the public, have been indifferent to water. Let us admit it. Everyone of us, whether we are farmers, townspeople or industrialists, have been indifferent to water. We have been thinking we can turn on the tap. because there is an unlimited supply where that water is coming from. The farmer irrigating his lands has been thinking this too, and in driving through my constituency and through many other constituencies, I have noticed the water flowing from the lands into the small streams. They too have been thinking there is an unlimited supply of water. If a shortage of water arises, the National Government is the first at which a finger is pointed and it is said that it does not plan well for the control of water. These are things we are committing and we must realize that we should do everything in our power to modernize and to plan more effectively. I want to plead to-day that every farmer who makes use of irrigation in the future should not employ the usual method of irrigating, but that he should be subsidized and forced by the State to use a spray system, even if it is an expensive system, because the usual method is, after all, a wastage of water. I thank the hon. the Minister when I drive through my country and see that the old ground furrows are being replaced by beautiful cement canals, but I also notice that where the cement canals also promote evaporation, underground pipes are also being laid to-day. This is the way we should deal with our most valuable asset, i.e. water. The most hardened soldier cannot go into any war if he does not have water in his bottle. I believe the men who undertook the trip to the moon also had to take water along because they knew there was no water on that planet. Man, animal, every living thing, needs water, and even a nuclear war cannot take place without water. Therefore I am not going to ask the Minister to give me this or that. The only thing I want to ask this evening, is that he should see to it that everything goes well with the water of the Republic of South Africa. We trust him and know that his Department will do everything in its power to give only its best to this people and this beautiful country, so that we shall not have to suffer, a shortage of water one day.

I want to associate myself with the hon. member who has just sat down, by saying that water most certainly is one of our most important gifts of nature, but unfortunately South Africa is not richly endowed with it. We do not have rain forests of any significance and we do not have large fresh water lakes. The average rainfall of South Africa is only 475 mm. per year, while that of the United States, for example, is 735 mm. per year. The water in all the rivers of South Africa is approximately 52,000 million cubic metres per year. This is only one-third more than the water in the Zambesi; or to put it differently, it is only a quarter of the water of the mighty Amazon. Factors such as abnormal climatic conditions and the very high rate of evaporation which we have in parts of our country, limit the available potential useful water supply to approximately 21,000 million cubic metres. Through thorough planning as well as the use of advanced technical knowledge, this figure can be raised to a possible 27,000 million cubic metres. At present the Republic of South Africa is using approximately 9,000 million cubic metres of water per year, and it is expected that by the end of this century this figure will have trebled, which means that early in the next century we shall need more water than the useful supply at our disposal to-day. How should we approach this serious problem, and in what is the possible solutions to be found to the shortage of water which will be facing us in 30 years’ time or more? Firstly we can, of course, endeavour to find additional water sources and start using them, and, secondly, we can do more to put the existing sources, the existing supplies, to better and more effective use.

Let us now consider the former, i.e. the possibility of obtaining additional sources. Experts tell us that the schemes which have been carried into effect in the country or which are in the planning stage are those which can be tackled most economically and which are or will be the most effective. In other words economically the schemes tackled after these will not be so profitable or effective. There is, of course, the breakthrough of our scientists in the field of the enrichment of uranium, and this has perhaps brought us a step closer to the possibility of the economic desalination of brackish and sea water, but we all have to admit that new sources of water supply are limited.

This therefore brings us to the second possibility. What can we do to exploit our available supplies more effectively? The fact is that in South Africa the agricultural industry is responsible for approximately 80 per cent of the water consumption and cities and industries for 20 per cent.

The agricultural experts will have to plan and experiment in order to find a way of substituting better methods for the age-old irrigation method to which my hon. friend over here also referred. We know that spray irrigation has been introduced, but there is a newer idea and that is drip irrigation and perhaps this can be applied successfully after further research has been done. The farmer has always concentrated on achieving maximum yield per surface area, but perhaps the time has arrived when we should strive after maximum yield per water unit.

The farmer, however, is a final consumer of water: therefore the re-use of effluent of cities and industries comes into prominence much more strongly and holds much more promise. Only about 20 per cent of the water made available to industries, is used in the manufacturing process and the balance of approximately 80 per cent is effluent. The struggle against water pollution and the reconsumption of effluent actually offer us the key to a possible solution for the water shortages of 30 years hence. I am aware of and this side of the House is appreciative of the work which is being done by our scientists and experts in this connection, but I think the hon. the Minister and his Department should concentrate on the re-use of industrial and urban water in particular. We are told that a saving of as much as 49 per cent can be achieved by the implementation of measures of this kind for the reconsumption of water. We are aware of the fact that there already are industries and one municipality in our country which have become thoroughly water conscious. In the case of the municipality they have introduced a purification process for the reconsumption of that city’s effluent. There are some of our industries which also re-use their own effluent. I wonder whether the most promising solution for South Africa is not to be found in this direction so that we may have sufficient water at our disposal for the future development of our country?

I agree with certain aspects which the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (City) mentioned in connection with the re-use of water, etc., but I am sure he will pardon me if I do not react to all his statements. I am very glad that so many positive contributions have been made and so many positive arguments have been put forward in this debate, because these have not only emphasized the importance of water to our economic survival in this country, but have also emphasized the importance of what the hon. the Minister and his Department have done in this connection. We on this side of the House, who are charged with the government of the country, are proud of the achievements of the National Party over the past 22 years, because we know that the interests and the future of our people are very closely tied up with the policy pursued by this Government. Therefore all of us gathered here today can reflect on the importance of water, because it is in fact as a result of what this Government has accomplished in this country that this development has come about, not only in the sphere of farming with its greater demand for water, but also in the expansion of industry. Moreover, the greater consumption of water, also as far as our urban complexes are concerned, is the reason why the importance of water has come to be stressed as it has been stressed in this debate to-day. Therefore it is necessary for us to examine this matter thoroughly. If we mean it well with South Africa, it has also become necessary for us to act dynamically and purposefully, not only to plan, but also to preserve and to exploit and to set about matters in such a way that this natural resource, water, will be harnessed not only to supply what we need from day to day, but also to safeguard the future of South Africa. We believe, of course, that South Africa has a great future. In this connection I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his Department. Firstly, I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister on the well-considered and positive measures which he has taken in his short period of office. I also want to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his Department on the scientific way in which they have dealt with this large-scale planning, the preservation, the extension and the development of South Africa’s water supply and water resources.

They must be developed in such a way that the future needs of South Africa will be met. By his actions and by his level-headed thinking the hon. the Minister has also succeeded, as he himself said a moment ago, in taking the entire people with him. In this year, the Water Year, we have taken due note of the fact that our whole population has been inspired by this enormous effort launched on the part of the Minister.

If one wants to make a proper evaluation of what the Government has been doing in recent times, it is necessary to take a look at a few aspects. In the first place, I should like to discuss the attitude which this Government and this Minister have displayed. It is and remains a fact that in the development of South Africa this Government has always attached great importance to the development of its natural resources and to the fact that this should take place in a balanced way. It has always been a fact that we should develop our natural resources in such a way that we do not only provide for the needs of the present, we must also develop them in such a way that South Africa will derive the maximum benefit in the long run and that the future of South Africa will be ensured. The Government has also attached great importance to water, which is one of the main components in this development programme. This attitude of the Government is borne out by the stream of legislation passed by this Parliament since this Government came into power. It has always been the earnest desire of this Government to conserve, to develop and to protect, but we should take note of another aspect as well, i.e. the way in which this Government has applied the physical resources at its disposal. If we take a look at this, we find that larger amounts of money and more manpower are being applied every year in order to develop this important resource. If we take a look at the figures on the Estimates and we see this dynamic increase in capital and manpower application over the past 22 years, with an equally large increase in the capacity of storage dams, the development of resources and the irrigation of land, and the enormous increase in industrial and domestic consumption, we know that this Government has a great task to perform. Before 1948 there were 44 dams in this country, with a capacity of just over 100 morgen feet and a combined capacity of 1,417,000 morgen feet. By 1968 this number of dams had increased to 188, with a capacity of 2,676,000 morgen feet. At present 30 more dams are being built, with a capacity of 3,650,000 morgen feet. Capital expenditure increased from just over R2 million in 1948 to approximately R47 million per year in 1968, and at present it is more than R100 million. I can continue in this way, but this will suffice.

If one looks at the future, which I should like to deal with, then it is a fact that we can face the future cheerfully because we know that the hon. the Minister and his Department mean it well with South Africa and its people and that they will make every effort to safeguard our future. I also want to refer to the Report of the Commission on Water Affairs. This report contains very comprehensive recommendations. It is of a very positive nature and, as the Minister indicated, many of these recommendations are already being implemented by the Department. One feels secure in the knowledge that this hon. Minister and his Department know what our problems are and are taking steps to solve them and are continuing to ensure the future of South Africa in this sphere as well.

The problems of South Africa are widespread. They are encountered in many spheres. But we should take a balanced view of the future and develop these resources in a balanced way. Therefore a person, and sometimes a whole community, feels sad that there are people who think that they have a duty always to act negatively and to give rise to reports such as the one which appeared in Die Beeld on 13th September, under the heading “Farmers on Gen. De Wet’s farm have to go”. The community of Koppies strongly resented this report. The Department of Water Affairs is taking positive steps in that area where soil surveys have been carried out, where R4½ million has already been spent on raising the wall of the Koppies Dam, and where every effort is being made to place this settlement, part of which dates from the days of Gen. De Wet, on a sound basis. Now there are people who are trying to destroy this good work of the Department of Water Affairs. One feels sorry that this should be the case. I also have here a certified copy of a letter from one of the people whose photographs appeared in that newspaper. He writes as follows (translation)—

[Time expired.]

In his speech the hon. member for Heilbron referred to the enormous progress which has taken place, the larger number of dams which have been built, etc. I think the hon. member is quite correct in giving those figures; no one is disputing that. We tell him in very plain language that, if South Africa wants to develop further, as we believe will be the case, we shall have to do a great deal more in the future. It is in fact the approach of this side of the House that with an eye to the future, to the increase of our population, to the industrial development and so forth, it is essential that we should investigate all channels to guarantee South Africa at least the water supply which it will need. This is the approach of this side of the House, which is in no way a negative one in this respect.

When I last spoke I was in fact pointing out to the hon. the Minister that the areas which would need the greatest quantity of water in future, would be our urban and peri-urban areas. Something which has always worried me, is the fact that so much storm water goes to waste, particularly when we have an enormous rain run-off. I wonder whether the hon. the Minister will be so kind as to have his Department conduct more research into this matter. I am convinced of the fact that if we can succeed in catching large quantities of this stormwater and reticulating it in some way so that it may be returned to our catchment areas or storage dams, we shall be able to save water to a large extent. We know that in our cities in the interior this water can be diverted to the rivers and be re-utilized. But it is particularly in our coastal cities that this storm water goes to waste in that it flows to the sea immediately. Consequently it is lost to us and to our development. It is precisely in view of what is happening in our coastal cities that I want to suggest to the hon. the Minister that he should tell us whether research in this connection can be done, and whether there is not some way of catching and re-using this water. I want to refer the hon. the Minister to a city like Port Elizabeth. A number of years ago the idea still was that Port Elizabeth would never experience difficulties with water in the future. It was thought that the Churchill Dam and others would be able to supply sufficient water for the next few decades. We are experiencing a serious drought in that area at present; so serious that water restrictions had to be imposed. These water restrictions are still in force in that area. Even in a place like Cape Town there were water restrictions during the past 12 months. I know it will be very difficult to catch this storm water, because some of these cities are situated against slopes which complicate the matter. But I now have in mind a specific place like Port Elizabeth. There we have the wonderful Baakens River. Is it impossible to build dams in that river so that the storm water may be caught instead of it flowing into the sea? In this way the storm water can be retained, even it has to be pumped back to the storage places which will built in that river. These are no more then proposals which one suggests. It is difficult for me to say whether they are practical or not.

I am nevertheless of the opinion, however, that all forms of water conservation for South Africa in future will necessarily have to become more and more practical. For example, I have in mind things like boreholes and tanks. We know that a tank at home may perhaps detract from a person’s beautiful garden and house. But it is not impossible to have these tanks underground. I honestly believe that the quantity of water running from a roof, can be stored and can in some way help to supplement the water which has to be pumped out of good catchment areas such as the Wemmershoek Dam or the Churchill Dam daily The amount of water which the public requires, is increasing all the time. People have gardens, they have swimming pools and human consumption also increases daily. From where must this water supply be supplemented? If one thinks in terms of tanks outside a house and underground tanks, a considerable amount of water can be stored for use every year. I am honestly convinced of the fact that we shall be able to supplement our water supply considerably in this way.

There is another point which I should like to mention to the Minister. Let us take a place such as Cape Town or Port Elizabeth. There is no reason why the consumer of water should not be encouraged to sink boreholes on his own plot. The water is lost to him in any case. He does not use that underground water. Why, in view of the fact that water is so expensive because it has to be purified, can we not use that subterranean water for our gardens and swimming pools? I would say that we should sink numerous boreholes all over the Karoo, in the drought-stricken areas or in the areas where the rainfall is lower, in an attempt to find more water. There the water table is of great importance. The water table is not of any importance in places where there is a high rainfall from time to time. I think local authorities should encourage their consumers to sink their own boreholes so that the demand for water from certain schemes can be decreased to a considerable extent.

There is another matter which I should like to bring home to the hon. the Minister. I am convinced of the fact—and I said this in previous debates in this House—that there are a large number of smaller irrigation schemes which can be carried out in the drought-stricken areas. These schemes cannot be carried out, however, because the financial position of most of the farmers is not such that they can tackle such a scheme on their own. In the second place, such schemes are not of such magnitude that the State is prepared to take a share in them. Let us briefly examine what the State is paying out in the form of subsidies I am told that the maximum subsidy is R3,000. What can one do with that maximum to-day?

Give me one example of a place where such a scheme will be that cheap.

I can give examples of many farms in the Karoo.

Give me some examples so as to facilitate the discussion of such schemes.

Sir, I do not want to mention a specific farm to the hon. the Minister. I just want to say that smaller schemes can be carried out on many of our Karoo farms.

For example?

For example in my area. Schemes can be carried out, but because such schemes are so expensive to-day and because the financial position of the farmers there is what it is and because the aid which they receive from the State is only R3,000 per scheme, such schemes are not being tackled. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I wish to confine myself to what the hon. member for Benoni said here in connection with mining development, which, according to him, was being restricted at the Uis mine in South-West Africa. He made the charge against the Government that the Uis mine had to use salt water from boreholes to supply its needs.

Are you going to grant it to the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs that water goes to the Bantustans?

I am dealing with the hon. member for Benoni now. I would appreciate it if the hon. member for Orange Grove would keep quiet and give me the opportunity of putting my case. I shall not allow myself to be prompted by the hon. member for Orange Grove. The hon. member for Benoni made a misrepresentation and I should like to put this matter right by saying that as far back as 1965 the Water Affairs division of the Administration of South-West Africa discussed the supply of water for domestic use with the mining bodies of Uis, particularly with a view to the establishment of growth points within the Damara homeland. At that time the mine management adopted the attitude that they had enough water. They even said that they were able to supply their own needs from their own sources there. Their attitude was therefore that they could supply their own needs for the present and possibly for the future as well. When that was put to me at the time, I said: “They have a snowball’s hope …” My words came true, because in that part of the world with its low rainfall it follows logically that if one finds fresh water in boreholes, it does not last long. One must then supply one’s needs by using brackish or salt water. If one wants fresh water, one has to cart it from the Uchab River or the Omaruru River, because the Uis mine is situated on the watershed between the two rivers. I want to make it very clear that the mining complex there had the opportunity of being supplied with water from the Uchab River or the Omaruru River by the State. By that time the Geological Survey, in collaboration with the N.I.W.R. of the C.S.I.R. had, by order of the South-West African Administration, already surveyed both rivers. It was then found that the water in that part of the Uchab River closest to the mine contained fluoride and that the water was not suitable for its domestic purposes. The result was that it was decided to obtain water from the Omaruru River. The project was submitted to the mining body. The economy of the whole matter was worked out and the mine initially did not accept the project. What the position is to-day, I cannot say. As far as I can remember, they apparently decided at a later stage, because of the critical position of the water supply, to accept the proposals of the Department of Water Affairs of South-West Africa. So much for that.

I now want to come to the next point which the hon. member made, in connection with the dolomitic formations as storage places for water. I think the hon. member was referring to and thinking of the position on the West Rand. I want to suggest that the hon. member did not know what he was talking about. The hon. member is so critical of the Government as far as the dewatering of those compartments in the dolomitic formation on the West Rand is concerned, but he will have to decide what is best for the State and what is best for the gold mines. The richest gold mine in the world, West Driefontein, is situated in that very area. What is more valuable, the mines there or the water which is being pumped out? Apart from that, there is another far greater problem. This is in fact the problem which the hon. member for South Coast strongly emphasized. This is the pollution of water. Everywhere in those areas we find the large minedumps. One of the big problems one finds on the Reef to-day, wherever there are large minedumps, is the problem of the pollution of surface water. The danger even exists that the water of the Vaal Dam may be polluted, if care is not taken to divert the surface water from the Rand from the catchment area of the Vaal River or to purify it. This water is destroying the biological life around those mines. No matter where the water is stored, that life will be destroyed. The hon. member has referred to the dolomitic formations as storage places. It would most certainly create a dangerous problem if this water which drains from the minedumps, were to be stored in the dolomitic formations.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.