Mr. Chairman, when the House adjourned last night, I was dealing with subhead K—Mechanical Transport—and an item under subhead G, namely the purchase of spare parts. I then went on to subhead R and dealt with the purchasing of new technical and fighting vehicles, as well as subhead S, namely the procurement of armaments. If you look at these items, Mr. Chairman, you find that these various subheads deal respectively with the purchase of vehicles, the purchase of vehicles and spares, and again the purchase of vehicles and spares. Under subhead S—Procurement of Armaments— one finds too that a very substantial amount of something like R19 million is to be set aside for the purchase of vehicles. The point I should like to make is this : Why is it that we have these items split up in this way? Surely, bearing in mind the policy that the purchase of armaments should come under one head, these various items should be consolidated and placed under the subhead dealing with the procurement of armaments? At the moment we seem to be making provision for vehicles under certain subheads and for the purchase of equipment and spares under other subheads. Seeing that we have the Armaments Board, constituted in the way it is today, I feel it is time to centralize purchasing under one Head. If this were done, I am sure we would get a better deal.

A further point which arises from this very substantial purchasing of vehicles, is the following : When one travels around, one sees large parking lots of army vehicles. One wonders what is done about the maintenance of these vehicles. I was in Europe a few years ago, and was shown one of the large vehicle parks run by the Americans. The park was about 2½ miles long and very wide, and it was a pleasure to find that every vehicle there was jacked up, and that there was a system according to which each one of these vehicles was started up periodically in order to check the batteries. One finds that if vehicles stand for a long time, they are susceptible to rust. There is condensation and rusting in the cylinders, the gearboxes and the differentials. If these vehicles are not constantly moved and properly looked after, you are asking for trouble. I should like to ask the Minister how long it will take him to get all these vehicles on the road in the case of emergency. From my own experience, I would say that from the way these vehicles are standing, it would take him an extra two to three weeks to get many of these vehicles on the road. It is very disappointing to find considerable amounts of costly equipment lying there, and not being cared for properly, either as a result of a shortage of staff, or for other reasons. I feel that if the Army cannot look after this equipment, they should have it done on a contract basis. They should make known their specifications and what they want done for the maintenance of these vehicles while they are laid up; I am fairly certain that they would find a contractor who would do the work for them, and look after these vehicles. This equipment must be kept properly so that it can be mobilized at very short notice. As I have said, you find proper maintenance of this type carried out in Europe, in the NATO parks. The equipment is kept practically on a 24-hour alert.

There is a further disappointing feature. I refer to standardization of equipment. I saw one unit moving recently, and I counted six different types of vehicles in that particular unit. Certain vehicles, of course, were fighting vehicles, and I shall not include them. In the case of what one could call second- and third-line vehicles, however, we counted two or three types. We know from experience that to maintain such a unit in the field is well-nigh impossible. Your maintenance units would have to carry an enormous amount of spares and the casualty in vehicles would be extremely high if there were no spares. When I returned from Rhodesia I passed some of the convoys coming back from the last big manoeuvres, and I counted 21 vehicles stranded along the roadside, four of them of different types. There were no spares for them, and recovery vehicles had to be sent all the way from Pretoria to tow these vehicles back. That gives you an idea of the position. One recovery vehicle had spares for only one make. I spoke to these chaps in charge and asked them : “Why do you not get these vehicles going?” They replied: “We have no parts; we shall have to tow these vehicles in.” All those vehicles were casualties.

Vehicles which break down become non-effective, and in order to maintain an army in the field today, one has to have standardization. Our experiences during the Second World War were that, in order to maintain standardization, we had to withdraw considerable numbers of vehicles from the field, and replace them with other vehicles. This had to be done simply from the point of view of spares maintenance. Therefore I should like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to bear this in mind. He is building up his equipment resources, and in order to have a high standard, there has to be a high degree of standardization. If this is not done, we are going to find ourselves in trouble. Once again, too. I should like to make an appeal in connection with vehicles which are laid up: every care should be taken with their maintenance. I know it is impossible to use all these vehicles and that they must be put in vehicle parks. At the same time, however, there must be a high standard of maintenance so that they can be made available at short notice. The Minister may say to me : “We do not have the staff.” That is no excuse. If that is the case, we must either stop purchasing vehicles or we must allow private contractors to undertake this maintenance.

I have been told, Sir, that it is the Government’s policy to spread its orders amongst the various motoring firms, in order to ensure a spread of the money which is being spent, and that this is the reason for the purchasing of various types of vehicles. Sir, that is false economy: it is wrong. The Government must find a suitable vehicle and then standardize, whether they can obtain other vehicles of a similar type or not. There is no point in buying different types of vehicles, because if those vehicles have to go into the field, we shall find ourselves in real trouble.

I wish to tell the hon. member who has just sat down that we are doing exactly what he is pleading for with regard to the maintenance of vehicles. There are different types in the Defence Force, and the reason for that is, firstly, that over the years we had a boycott against us and, secondly, up to a number of years ago we did not have the policy of standardization. We have now accepted that policy, and we are doing exactly what the hon. member has pleaded for.

Sir, I wish to express my appreciation for the good wishes extended to Admiral Biermann, since he is not able to speak here for himself. I want to add that the fact that the Government entrusted this important post to him shows that we also have the fullest confidence in his capabilities. I am convinced that, like his predecessor, he will be able to depend on the capable support of the various members of the Supreme Command and the senior officers of the Defence Force. Furthermore, Sir, I am happy to say that just a little while ago we succeeded in retaining the valuable services of Prof. Samuels as the head of our Armaments Organization for a further period of five years. I wish to express my appreciation for the fact that Prof. Samuels agreed to place his services at our disposal for another five years. With Admiral Biermann and Prof. Samuels at the head of affairs, I think we can look forward to the future with confidence.

Hon. members on both sides, especially the hon. members for Durban Point, Stellenbosch and North Rand, referred to the threat against South Africa and Southern Africa as whole. That threat should not be seen as a threat directed only against Southern Africa and as a threat that owes its origin to the actions of the various countries in this part of the Continent. It is a threat against Africa in the first place. It is a fight on the part of communism to control Africa and, through the control of Africa, to overthrow Europe. Furthermore, it is a threat directed through Africa and through Europe against the Western and the whole Free World. Even in his time the late Pres. Kennedy quite correctly stated—

Sir, that must always be kept in mind in dealing with the problem of this threat against Southern Africa and the Republic of South Africa. This threat against South Africa and the broader threat against Southern Africa is part of the threat against the whole Free World; it is part of a greater strategy directed against the forces of civilization. To the north of us we have to deal with the growing effort of forces determined to increase the menace of revolutionary warfare and gradually to undermine our will-power to oppose it. The possibility of an escalation of this revolutionary effort in future cannot be excluded. The hon. member for North Rand quite correctly referred to the possible escalation of this revolutionary effort after the conclusion of the work at present being done on the Tanzam Railways and the different road networks. Moscow and Peking and their satellites, as I have said, are busy with the application of a world strategy. That strategy includes the military threat, the straightforward economic challenge, intimidation by sea-power, the political challenge and diplomatic action, but lastly, there is the revolutionary challenge in most Western countries, while there is no challenge on the part of the West in communist countries. To counteract that strategy, we should dedicate ourselves to the creation of an opposing will. I have pleaded for this on different occasions in this House in the past. We should counteract that strategy by dedicating and preparing ourselves to create an opposing will in more than the military field. To attain that devotion we must educate public opinion and counter communist propaganda, not by competing with communist propaganda in trying to out-communist Communism and its fellow-travellers, but by being prepared to create counteraction and sending out a different message to the world. There are signs, Mr. Chairman— encouraging signs—in the Free World that the position of South Africa and Southern Africa is better understood today than before. Secondly, it is being realized more and more that the Cape sea route and a stable Southern Africa are of the utmost value to those countries which depend on ½ million tons of oil carried around the Cape of Good Hope every day. But I do not think it is in the interest of South Africa at this stage to say too much about these encouraging signs. I think we should rather approach these matters in a different way—by individual discussions and discussions at Government level.

*The hon. member for North Rand asked what we were doing towards coming to an agreement with countries which have the same interests as we have. My reply to him is, firstly, that we are making facilities available for the defence of our friends as well. While there was a boycott against us and while there was a total effort, on the part of friendly countries as well, to deny us arms, we did not hesitate to take the necessary steps in respect of our maritime defence to create facilities which we regard as essential for the defence of our friends as well. Let me mention a few: the establishment of the Maritime Headquarters, which is an enormous big project involving several millions; the establishment of a submarine base, which is intended not only for us, but which offers facilities to others as well; the extension of our harbour facilities; the improved navigation system; the Decca navigation system, which has been referred to here and about which I shall say more later; the building-up of our Air Force and, within our limited means, the modernization of our Navy. We have taken those steps, sometimes with great sacrifice and sometimes in the face of boycotts which denied us these essential things. But today we can look back upon the success we have achieved over the past years and great milestones we have reached in the sphere of providing facilities to possible friends. Somebody said quite rightly: “Our trade routes will continue to be secure only as long as we give clear evidence of our intention to protect them.” By its actions and the preparations it makes, South Africa should also place itself in a position where it can convince others that it wants to play its part in the defence of the West and of the Free World. Secondly, my reply to the hon. member was that we were continuing to fulfil our commitments under the Simonstown Agreement in letter and in spirit, and the best contribution we can make in order to convince people that it is in their interests to co-operate with us, is to honour our part of the agreement. Thirdly, we are prepared to conduct discussion on the service level, as well as on a higher level, by exchanging information; this we are in fact doing; and by joint exercises we can encourage mutual trust between friendly countries. In that regard we have also made progress. Fourthly, we let no opportunity pass by of advocating and promoting the possibilities of greater maritime and other co-operation in the Southern Hemisphere, but I do not think it is desirable to conduct a public debate on this aspect either. In my opinion it would be a mistake to spell out everything in detail, except to say that it cannot be expected of South Africa to carry out long-distance sea reconnaissance alone. It is not South Africa’s burden alone; the burden of long-distance sea reconnaissance in the Southern Hemisphere is the burden of others as well, and it would pay the West and the Free World to carry out long-distance sea reconnaissance jointly with and with the inclusion of South Africa.

†The hon. member for Durban Point spoke about delays and the high cost of Decca and Advokaat. The Advokaat project, as is of course well known, is the new maritime headquarters connected with Walvis Bay and Durban as advance bases. The fact is that I think his figures and his statements are not quite correct.

*As far as Advokaat is concerned, this was an undertaking of very great magnitude. As I have said, many millions were spent on it. There has been a delay of six months, which is not long in such a big undertaking. I think priceless work has been done and I am assured that the cost—I have the figure here—is minimal, that is to say, the extra cost as a result of this delay. The increase in cost is a minimal one. I shall give it to the hon member personally. But if everything goes well, we hope to have the Advokaat project completed by October, and then the hon. member may come to take a look at it.

Then there is Decca. All the construction work has been completed. Receivers have been installed in ships. The installations of the Air Force have progressed far. Maps have reached the completion stage. I am referring now to the maps which may be used by all. I do not want to say anything about the other aspect. There has been an increase in cost and a delay because we tried to use local content for the project, and eventually we had to revert to certain imported parts. I understand the cost involved in the project is still below the figure originally estimated.

But not the electronic portion.

That may be, but it is still below the total figures estimated.

†Then the hon. member referred to the surpluses of Armscor and I think he mentioned the figure of R47 million.

It should be Armaments Board.

Yes, it should be the Armaments Board. There again the hon. member is not correct. In the first place there is a vast difference between Armscor and the Armaments Board. The Armaments Board is a board which deals with the acquisition of and the application of several tests in the production of arms. Secondly I am informed that there are no surpluses in the usual sense of the word.

*What happened, was that the money which had been made available to the Armanents Board, the “Krygstuigraad,” those so-called surpluses, was money in respect of which commitments had already been entered into and which had been temporarily invested with the Public Debt Commissioners to be used as soon as it had to be paid out. There was no question of large-scale surpluses.

It does not appear in the balance sheet.

There are no large-scale surpluses, as the hon. member suggested. It is wrong to talk of surpluses in that sense. But what I do want to say to the hon. member is this. The principle of building up a surplus is not wrong. The late Mr. Havenga did so in his time already.

† He created a Special Defence Account for unforeseen circumstances and during the years we used the money in the Special Defence Account to such an extent that the funds are very low at present, and I am against that. I am all for creating a proper and strong Special Defence Account for unforeseen circumstances, and I hope the hon. member agrees with me.

Yes, in normal circumstances.

But he should make a clear distinction between the Special Defence Account and the money on hand which is to be used to meet accepted commitments as soon as deliveries take place. In regard to the delivery of arms, the hon. member knows that delays sometimes occur, delays of a few months or longer. These things are sometimes influenced by strikes or by delivery problems in other countries. All these things have an effect on the amount that is kept available, and this is the reason why that amount appears there.

The hon. member referred to money being spent on men as opposed to machinery or arms. I am glad the hon. member raised that. I want to dwell on that question for a while today. There is a wrong impression in several quarters in the country that we spend money only on armaments and not on people. But let us look at the Budget before us. I have glanced briefly at just a few of these aspects. If you look at Loan Votes M and K, you see that, to begin with, literally millions are appropriated for operational buildings and housing.

The operational buildings and housing are aimed directly at facilitating matters for the people in the Defence Force by creating more favourable conditions for them. In addition to that, the Government has agreed to 100 per cent loans for all members of the Defence Force. We are gradually implementing that principle. In addition to what the Departments of Community Development and Public Works are doing, an amount of approximately R5 million is being spent by the Defence Force’s own sections in order to create favourable living conditions for the members of the Defence Force. R94 million has been provided for salaries; almost R2 million has been provided for medical services —free medical services are supplied to members of the Defence Force; R1 400 000 has been provided for subsidies and financial assistance. In the course of the debate reference was made to dental services. I agree with hon. members; I, too, think that these services should be provided, and not only temporary fillings. This is a matter we are still attending to and I have full sympathy with it, because I think it is right.

I want to come to another aspect in regard to the treatment of the people. We are making progress with our division for the utilization of leisure time, our sport division, our psychological services division, which falls under the Surgeon-General, and our welfare division. All these divisions—sport, utilization of free time, psychological services and welfare services—are aimed at making the people in the Defence Force happier. I just want to mention a few examples. In the past two years the sport division offered 100 short courses which were attended by 11 000 members of the South African Defence Force. Since this sport division was established a few years ago, we have already produced 120 Springboks and/or national champions. We have produced 700 provincial sportsmen, and 42 officially recognised types of sport are played in the Defence Force today. Then it is said that we do not pay attention to the way the people spend their leisure time ! Indoor sport is also offered.

The division for the utilization of leisure time is under the charge of an extremely capable officer. I personally went to see what they were doing in order to ensure good utilization of leisure time by the young men in the evenings and after hours, and I was impressed by the tremendous programmes they are carrying out.

There is the psychological services division, which is doing splendid work and which is concentrating more and more on placing the boys in such a way that they follow a natural direction which fits in with their aptitudes. This division is under the charge of extremely capable people. There are our chaplain services; there are fulltime chaplains, representing all denominations, as well as part-time chaplains. These people are of inestimable value to the South African Defence Force. I want to pay tribute today to the chaplains of all the denominations—I had the privilege off meeting them at a conference here recently—for the great work they are doing in regard to our Defence Force.

Therefore it is not correct to say that we are neglecting the people; the reverse is nearer the truth. Let me give an example. 31 per cent of our Budget is spent on staff services in some or other of these forms. In a country such as Germany, whose armaments are supplied by other countries, because it is not allowed to produce its own, it is 38 per cent. That is a very good comparison. Besides, the morale of the Defence Force depends not only on the services provided to the staff in the personal sphere, but also on something else, namely the quality of the armaments given to them. I want to suggest that in spite of all the obstacles in our way, we have accomplished a tremendous amount in the past year in respect of making proper armaments available to our people. However, this is also the aspect which causes the Budget to increase so much. This is the headache of every ministry of defence in the world today. I am talking now of the high costs of armaments which escalate year after year. It is not our fault, but due to world circumstances. It is the tremendous increase in knowledge in the technological age which is making armaments more sophisticated, which has doubled the price of aircraft within 10 years and which has more than doubled the price of ships. It is this escalation in costs which has caused the Defence Budget to increase quite disproportionately.

†The hon. member for Durban Point referred to the question of the notification to parents of their children’s illness. I can only say that I fully agree with him. Only a fortnight ago I again requested the Commandant-General to give an instruction in this connection, because I also received complaints. I do not think it is due to commanding officers neglecting their duty; it is due rather to the form in which they notified parents. In serious cases the parents are immediately notified but in less serious cases they do not always tell parents that their sons are in hospital. As far as possible this will be done in future in every case, whether it is serious or not. Instructions in this regard have been given.

The hon. member also referred to the question of pistol clubs. I am sorry, but we cannot take over the pistol clubs. We have enough work to do as it is; moreover, I think this is a Police matter. I do, however, have sympathy in regard to one aspect of this matter …

Can Civil Defence not take it over?

No, even Civil Defence cannot take it over. Since January of this year we have reduced the price of ammunition by about 25 per cent and these pistol clubs now share in these cheaper prices. It is furthermore against our policy to do retailing ourselves. I will take this matter up with the Minister of Police, but I would prefer that the hon. member first speak to the Minister of Police, who is responsible for these pistol clubs. As far as we are concerned, I do not think we want to take them over.

*I now come to the hon. member for Potchefstroom, who raised several important matters. In the first place he referred to the encouragement of the art of shooting. In the past few years we have promoted this with the greatest dedication. I personally am very sympathetic towards it and today much more time is spent on it during exercises. Instructions have been issued that the young men should shoot more and that there should be more practices. This is in fact being done. It also keeps our armament factories busy. In other words, I have the fullest sympathy with the basic statement of the hon. member. As regards his reference to shooting ranges, I just want to say to him that I think we in South Africa can consider ourselves fortunate in so far as shooting ranges are concerned, because in Europe the problem as regards shooting ranges is much bigger than here. The particular shooting range to which the hon. member referred, the De Wet range, is one for which I have a great deal of sympathy and I should like to help if I can obtain the money. I cannot always obtain the money, but if the persons concerned want to proceed to drilling the borehole and planting the trees in the meantime, they may do so with pleasure. We shall then come into the picture at a later stage. I realise the necessity of enlarging that range.

The hon. member also referred to the advanced defence college, and I should like to make a brief statement now on the possibilities of having an advanced defence college. The need for a joint Defence Force institution for higher military education has crystallised in the course of time and has been intensified by the new system for the training and development of future officers of the Permanent Force, a system that was introduced in 1970. According to this system, the officer receives his basic moulding and academic training at the Academy and his professional training in the schools of his own arm of the Defence Force. Further development to qualify him for the responsibilities of taking charge of a unit and of doing staff work within his own arm of the Defence Force, takes place at the respective Army, Air Force and Naval colleges. The function of the South African Defence College will be to prepare the more senior officers of all three arms of the Defence Force, from commandants upwards, for senior commanding and staff posts on a joint basis. Two courses are envisaged : A joint staff course of 21 weeks for 24 students for the purpose of extending the training of selected officers for senior commanding and staff appointments by a study of joint operations, advanced military management and related aspects of national and international security against the background of functional strategy. Then there is a second course, namely the national defence course. This course is envisaged for the future. The duration and number of students must still be determined. The aim is to hold a study course in which selected staff from other State and semi-State departments which play a part in ensuring the security of the Republic, will be included. The study course will deal mainly with the functions of military-economic, military-scientific, political and psychological factors in the total strategy.

The South African Defence College was formally established on 1st March, 1972. The following posts were created to make provision for the planning and preparation of the first joint staff course, which we hope will commence in 1973. The commanding officer is a brigadier, namely Brig. H. J. P. Burger of the South African Air Force. He has been appointed as commanding officer and was selected for this post by virtue of his qualifications and experience. He holds a B.Sc. degree and has completed the British Joint Services Staff Course. He served for four years as a senior control staff officer at the Air Force College and from 1967 he was the Defence Force Attaché in the United States of America. In addition, there will be senior control staff officers and a control staff officer from the Army, the Air Force and the Navy. The possibility of using the buildings of the South African Army College or the Defence College and of moving the Army College elsewhere, was investigated extensively, but this proposal, as well as the proposal that the Defence College should be a lecturing unit for the Army College, presents overwhelming practical problems which we have not yet solved. In the meantime we are still trying to house this Defence College temporarily in other buildings. Until such time as clarity is reached about that, I can say no more. In this regard I just want to say that if the hon. member can help me to acquire the land and the old buildings at Potchefstroom, we shall use them in any case, even if not for this purpose.

Then the hon. member referred to the question of the abolition of higher posts. For the first time in the history of South Africa a proper inspection has been carried out in all arms of the Defence Force in the past six years, not only of the top structure, but also of the various divisions of the Defence Force. Drastic steps were taken in respect of the revision of the control structure and the command structure. The CDS Division of the Controller’s division was inspected; the Air Force division was inspected; and the Army and the Navy were inspected. The inspection of the Air Force and of the Navy was completed only recently. Furthermore, a directorate of management services was created which followed up these basic inspections, and as a result of this certain posts were arranged differently than in the past. Some posts were abolished. In order to give the hon. member an idea, I may just mention that there were more than 150 posts on the establishment of the Civil Defence division, and these were reduced to 30. Large-scale savings were introduced, as was rationalisation. As a result of these inspections, certain posts became redundant. A report on this recently appeared in the Press. It has been asked whether there are posts in the higher cadres as well, namely that of general, which can disappear. The reply to that is “Yes”. It cannot be done on a large scale, but there are a few posts with the rank of general which will not be filled again when the present incumbents retire from them. There are only a few of these posts, but this is the position. In the meantime the inspection is continuing and management techniques are being applied in order to achieve greater efficiency. I want to say this afternoon, and I am saying this with the approval of all the most senior officers, including the Commandant-General, that we shall continually apply self-criticism and see whether we can improve our management methods and efficiency.

The hon. member also referred to the question of drivers’ licences. Section 141 of the Defence Act sets out the position in respect of drivers’ licences clearly. Up to now, the provinces have refused to recognize those licences, and I suspect it is a question of money. Perhaps we shall persuade them later, but at the moment this is the position.

Then the hon. member, as well as the hon. member for Salt River, referred to the question of the variety of vehicle models in the Defence Force. As far as our aircraft are concerned, we also have different models. It is true that we have too many types of aircraft, but this was caused by circumstances beyond our control. Since the establishment and reorganization of the Armaments Board and since the entire purchasing machine was reorganized under the guidance of Prof. Samuels and his Armaments Board, the principles of rationalisation and standardization have been introduced. We are applying these consistently and shall continue to do so in future. It is only a question of time and patience.

†The hon. member for East London North referred to the call-up of young men during January and July, and he referred to the fact that some young men who applied for call-up in the Navy eventually landed in the Air Force or in the Army. That is so.

*I am informed that there are various reasons for that, but I do not want to read out long statements in that regard now. In the first place, it is connected with the fact that young men do not always fill in their questionnaires properly. That is so, and I have satisfied myself of that. I noticed from some of the questionnaires that some young men think they are making jokes when they fill in the questionnaires. The result is that they land up in places where they should not have. Such a person still has the right to request a transfer to a place that suits him. In the second place, the numbers of the Air Force and the Navy are small and limited. The great majority of the young men must go to the Army divisions. I must say today that I get the impression that it has a sort of snob value for some families if a young man is sent to the Air Force or Navy. It seems to me as if they regard the Army as being of less importance. I think this tendency must be eliminated. A boy should go where he fits in best and where he can be absorbed, viewed against the background of the numbers and the problems. The Defence Force, the registration officer and the Defence Force heads do their best to comply with the wishes of these young men as far as possible, but this cannot always be done. As far as the intake of university students is concerned, this may improve now that the Army is going to have three intakes per year. This arrangement may improve the position.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? When may a young man apply for a transfer?

If a young man is unhappy after he has been allocated to his particular unit, he may talk to his commanding officer and may even go to the highest authority. He may go as far as the Minister if he is unhappy. But I want to make it clear that in practice it is sometimes simply impossible.

As far as the question of assignation to the Navy is concerned, I have already replied to questions in that regard on the Order Paper.

I am sorry we cannot deviate from that policy. I must maintain that policy as far as possible.

I have already told the hon. member that, if this were not the policy, the present Commandant-General would not have been in the Navy. He is a man who comes from Christiana. He would have had to swim to the Navy along the Vaal River, and I do not know how he would have managed that.

The hon. member for Pretoria District raised the question of medals. New medals have been introduced, i.e. the Danie Theron medal and the Jack Hindon medal. At present we are reconsidering the entire set of medals, I shall take a look at the matter. But as regards the extra money in the Budget, my information is that it has to do with the special commendation of the Commandant General.

The hon. member for De Aar referred to the Defence Force as more than a mere military machine, i.e. as a symbol of nationhood. In spite of everything that has been said and in spite of all the gossip, I want to say that I still support the view that the South African Defence Force is a symbol of South African nationhood and that the Defence Force represents the people of South Africa as a whole. I hope we shall be responsible enough not to drag in things here which belong to the political sphere—where we attack one another and sometimes have to attack one another—and in this way try to arouse disloyalty within the Defence Force. I shall adhere to my undertakings in respect of the Defence Force. I expect bilingualism of an officer. I expect bilingualism of every arm of the Defence Force—that is an instruction—and I expect loyalty from officers. I expect them to serve the Government of the day. As long as that happens, hon. members will get no politics in the Defence Force from my side.

Nobody has spoken against that.

Why may I not say it then?

In addition, I should like to make an important, brief statement in regard to armaments and ammunition. It is the task of the Government to ensure that the Republic of South Africa has a balanced Defence Force in order to resist threats, both conventional and unconventional. Prospective industrialists and investors often inquire whether we are really spending enough to resist such threats, with reference to what we are spending on defence in comparison with other countries. In comparison with other countries, we are spending little. When replies are given to such inquiries, it is made very clear that the Republic of South Africa does not intend participating in an unhealthy armaments race and ignoring its real capacity, but that we prefer to concentrate on the maximum utilization of the available funds in order to ensure in this way that the highest degree of efficiency is nevertheless maintained. I think South Africa may rightly be proud of what has already been achieved, and I want to repeat today what I have said before : The Republic can no longer be isolated by arms boycotts. South Africa is absolutely self-sufficient as far as its domestic requirements are concerned, and an intensive investigation is being carried out at the moment with a view to the exportation of such armaments. Because we may embarrass buyers and possible prospective buyers to some extent, it is not advisable that I should furnish more details today on what measure of success has already been achieved. However, if there are countries which are not prepared to supply us with armaments for the defence of the important Cape sea-route, they should ask themselves to what extent their attitude is really In the interests of the survival of Western civilization.

Now I want to say a few words in regard to ammunition. We are engaged in the development of advanced types of ammunition in definite fields. There is reason to believe that we are going to achieve great success in this, but at this stage it is not advisable that more details be divulged. I just want to emphasize the fact that we are manufacturing advanced forms of ammunition.

Secondly, there is the question of explosives. In nursuance of the statement I made on 11th February, 1971, in regard to the gradual take-over by Armscor of the manufacturing operations carried out by African Explosives and Chemical Industries, negotiations have progressed to such an extent that we have been able to take over successfully the manufacturing responsibilities in respect of explosives and armaments within a year. At present these operations are being carried out by two separate affiliated companies of Armscor.

Cannons : A further break-through in the sphere of self-sufficiency in our country took place a few weeks ago when firing tests with the first completely locally manufactured 90 mm cannons were conducted successfully. The cannon plant is in full production at the moment and we are able to manufacture calibres which vary between 20 mm and 260 mm bored and 20 mm and 160 mm ground.

Fighting and other vehicles: The Armaments Board is engaged in evaluating available concepts of Infantry Fighting Vehicles. The vehicle which will be chosen, must comply with modern standards and be suitable for local manufacture.

Attention is being given to the design of a second generation wheeled armoured vehicle for use as a successor to the Eland armoured cars. South Africa is already independent of countries abroad in respect of the manufacture of armoured cars, and in collaboration with car manufacturers, the manufacture of soft-shell vehicles with a larger local content as well, is being investigated.

Electronics : In the sphere of electronics he following may be mentioned: Local industry has developed a new man-pack transmitting/receiving communication system for use by the commandos. This system makes maximum use of locally manufactured components and weighs only 1 kg as opposed to the 7 kg of its predecessor. Secondly, I want to say that a radio beacon for our parachute troops has been developed locally and is in production at present. Both types of equipment mentioned above are of note in an international sense, and the latter has already attracted inquiry from another country, with a view to obtaining rights. Pioneering work is being done in regard to the development of a portable radar detection system which compares favourably with the best elsewhere. It is used for guarding places against invasion. An advanced and unique system of identifying aircraft is being developed.

As far as aircraft are concerned, light aircraft and machines are being designed and developed in the Republic at present. Besides a military utilization, such aircraft will have a commercial utilization as well. In order to meet the acute shortage of trained artisans in the aircraft industry, priority has been given to the establishment of effective facilities for apprentices. This has stimulated the training of South Africans in this particular industry, as far as manufacturing and servicing are concerned. At the beginning of this year almost 500 locally recruited apprentices were employed, and in this way the foundations were laid for an industry with a more pronounced South African character.

Commercial production: The past year was also characterized by an achievement in the field of commercial production. For the first time both a hunting rifle and a target-shooting rifle have been designed and manufactured locally. A wide series of calibres and models, to meet all requirements, is being manufactured at present. Although the prices of series and models may differ, accuracy and quality in respect of all remain of a high standard. The success our rifles have achieved in competition with imported products is phenomenal, as hon. members have probably heard through the Press and radio. Consequently, in the pride we take in this achievement we know that in quality our product is equal to or even better than imported products, and I have with me proof by experts in this field. Functional tests carried out with our guns by local experts and also by experts abroad, have resulted in an interest in our products which grows daily. I have complete confidence that in this field South Africa will capture a significant section of the international market. Planning for the manufacture of a shotgun, a 22 rifle and a pistol has reached an advanced stage and will be stimulated as soon as the new factory premises in Bloemfontein are occupied later this year. I think it will take place by September or October.

In regard to commercial central-fire cartridges and rim-fire cartridges and shot cartridges, success has already been achieved in satisfying the major consumer preferences in regard to calibres and bullet weights. Over and above functional and experimental range tests by the factories and the S.A.D.F., the co-operation of other authorities as well is being sought for research and tests with a view to accomplishing ever-increasing quality.

Reduced consumer prices of ammunition, which came into effect as from 1st January this year, have stimulated both the hunting sport and target-shooting sport. Sales of commercial ammunition have surpassed all projections by at least 50 per cent.

I felt I had to inform this House about this. The question of the reply I owe the hon. member in regard to the Citizen Force, still remains, but I first want to sit down for a while so that other hon. members may speak again. In addition, there is the question of civil defence which the hon. member for North Rand raised. I shall deal with it later.

Mr. Chairman, I think the House has listened attentively and appreciatively to the speech made by the hon. the Minister. I particularly liked his introduction, when he pointed out that the threat to South Africa did in fact imply a greater threat to Africa. At the end of his speech the hon. the Minister also referred to our arms position and to those countries which take pleasure in boycotting us in this sphere. I think South Africa owes the hon. the Minister of Defence and his Supreme Command a debt of gratitude for the way in which they have created confidence in the Defence Force of South Africa. They have succeeded in creating not only the confidence of the population of South Africa in the Defence Force, but also the confidence of the entire Western world in the striking power of South Africa.

Actually, I want to refer briefly to a matter which is very near to my heart and which I believe constitutes our main threat, and that is the danger of terrorism. At the outset I want to make three statements in this regard. In the first place, I want to make the statement that terrorism is a child of international communism, and that it is a phenomenon of the modern world which has come to stay. The reason for my saying it is a phenomenon of the communist world, is that one can find its traces especially in those countries such as Cuba, Algeria and others, in which the communist arm has canned out its onslaughts, and which have been conquered by the communists. Furthermore, I believe that terrorism will become more and more extensive and that the seventy-two countries of the U.N. which at present are directly and indirectly supporting terrorism against Southern Africa, will in due course possibly become its greatest victims. I believe that this is possibly going to be the seed which is sown today and will eventually force the U.N. to its knees and possibly wipe it out. Sir, it is interesting to note that the U.N.’s organs and mechanism are set up in such a way that it can cope with the danger of world wars today, wars which may be started, but it does not have the organs or the mechanism for opposing terrorism anywhere in the world.

The second statement I want to make, is that in the years that lie ahead terrorism will completely replace the old method of warfare, and that it will develop further as a very fine art in the science of warfare. Let us just take a look at the difference between the two. In the old, conventional method of warfare, we have had, since the Middle Ages, careful definitions, consolidated in international law, of the rights of countries at war and of the rights and commitments of neutral countries Every facet of war and warfare has been defined in it, but as far as terrorism is concerned, the position is different; there is no rule whatsoever, and in the decades ahead there will perhaps be no rule either. According to the old method of warfare, the soldier is brought to the battlefield; he fires the shot and in that manner he defends his country. But terrorism is quite a different science. The terrorist is not only taught to handle the weapon and fire the shot, but also trained in the manufacture of the weapon; he is trained in the finer arts of psychology; he is taught all the finer points in respect of this new weapon of war that has made its appearance in the world.

I want to make a third statement, namely that in its onslaught on South Africa international communism has chosen terrorism merely in order to bluff the West by pretending that this is a so-called freedom movement. Sir, we know that terrorism today is no freedom movement. We know that people are being trained by Cubans, by Russians, by Algerians, etc. What freedom would Cubans and Algerians come to seek here in South Africa? Therefore it is merely a pretext by means of which international communism is hoodwinking the Western world today. After South Africa has become the prey, and after Africa has become the prey, as the hon. the Minister indicated, this weapon will be directed further at the free world, as we all know. Therefore I want to make the plea today that in the years that lie ahead South Africa will concentrate on preparing itself for this new method of warfare—terrorism. Our men will not only have to receive that subtle, scientific training and acquire those fine arts which the man of the veld must know, as well as the finer points of psychology; the equipment of our Defence Force will also have to be adopted and adjusted to this particular method of warfare. I also want to ask for consideration to be given to the training and sending of members of commandos to the fronts, where they may gain the necessary knowledge for combating terrorism. We shall also have to do more than that. In the years ahead we shall have to demonstrate very clearly to the West and to the Free World that this onslaught is aimed at the Free World, and that as a result of its strategic position South Africa has merely become the first target in this stage; that the onslaught on us will merely be the first step. Sir, I think that at this stage one should also sound a warning to those states which are so keen today to accommodate terrorism and to help against Southern Africa. Terrorism is a double-edged sword. We know that in view of its demographic features, Africa lends itself particularly to a paradise for terrorism. There is not one single country in Africa which does not have to contend with numerous population groups, and for that reason terrorism can be fanned in any country in Africa, with disastrous consequences. As a last resort, I want to ask that serious consideration be given to the possibility of combating the onslaught of terrorism against South Africa by granting assistance ourselves to terrorist organizations in order to pay back in their own coin other countries which are today providing terrorism against South Africa with camps and training. Sir, I think that terrorism constitutes a tremendous threat today. We have merely seen the beginnings of it. But now I want to ask that the hon. the Minister of Defence should give thought to entering into an agreement with other countries which are interested in law and order in this part of the world, in this important strategic position occupied by South Africa, agreement similar to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and that we should include in such an agreement countries such as South Africa, Madagascar, Malawi and others that are involved in the matter, in order that an alliance may be formed which may ensure, in particular, that this particular strategic point of Africa will remain protected for the Western World.

Mr. Chairman, may I add my congratulations and good wishes to the new Commandant-General, Admiral Biermann, and wish him a happy and successful term of office.

I want to bring one specific matter to the hon. the Minister’s attention, and that is the question of the treatment of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the detention barracks at Voortrekkerhoogte. Sir, I am not going to go into the sentences imposed by the court on Jehovah’s Witnesses or conscientious objectors, because that is part of the terms of reference (clause 10) of the amending Bill which has been sent to a Select Committee. I am not going to touch on any aspect, therefore, which refers to the repetitive sentences imposed by the courts. What I want to raise with the hon. the Minister is the actual treatment of the men who have already been sentenced, how they have been treated in the past in detention barracks at Voortrekkerhoogte and how some of them are still being treated. I think I am correct in saying that something like 65 young Jehovah’s Witnesses between the ages of 18 and 22 were in detention barracks at Voortrekkerhoogte at the beginning of this month. Some of them may have been released since then, but at that time there were something like 65. I have written to the Defence Department and I have put questions to the hon. the Minister about the conditions under which these young men are being kept in detention barracks at Voortrekkerhoogte. It seems to me, from the answers I have received from the Director-General of the Defence Personnel Department and from the terms of the replies to questions that it is quite possible that the higher authorities are not aware of the savage treatment which these young men have been receiving.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

The hon. member should be ashamed of himself. Every time I bring up any questions of injustice, hon. members tell me that I should be ashamed of myself. What they should be ashamed of is that people come to me with these cases and do not go to them. Sir, a point that I want to make is that conditions have recently improved. I have been informed by the parents of these young men that since a major visited the detention barracks last month, or perhaps early this month, conditions have improved; that, for instance, they have been allowed to have a minister of their own religion visiting them on Sundays and conducting a half-hour service, and that some of the washing privileges, or let me rather say washing facilities because they cannot be called privileges, which had been denied them, have since been restored. Nevertheless, Sir, I believe that a full-scale inquiry—an independent one if possible—should be instituted and, if necessary, disciplinary action taken against those officers in charge, one in particular whose name I shall not mention, who appear to have been conducting a vindictive vendetta against these people. I want to mention the regulations under which these young men are held, according to a letter which I received from Defence Headquarters. It seems that the complaint has been that these young men who are sentenced to a term of imprisonment by a court are then put into continuous solitary confinement, while they are in the detention barracks, for refusing to obey a lawful order, which is of course to get into uniform in the detention barracks. But the point is that according to regulations— and I now quote from the letter which was sent to me and according to what the hon. the Minister has told me, solitary confinement with spare diet not exceeding six days at a time and of which not more than two days shall be served in any period of seven consecutive days, and of which spare diet shall not be enforced during the 24 hours preceding release may be imposed—those are the regulations laid down and the hon. the Minister’s reply gave me much the same information. I was also told in the same letter from defence headquarters that solitary confinement without spare diet may also be imposed for a period of 14 consecutive days, at the termination of which the prisoner shall not, within 48 hours, be required to serve any further punishment of solitary confinement either with or without spare diet. Now, according to the information I have received via letters and indeed personal visits from parents of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the young men are in fact kept in continuous solitary confinement.

Nonsense.

The hon. the Minister may say it is nonsense, but I want him to institute an inquiry because I do not believe …

I believe my officers.

Well, I am not asking you to believe me, but why should I concoct this? Why should the parents of these young men concoct this? It is bad enough to be in gaol. It is bad enough to be in detention barracks and it is bad enough to be in solitary confinement under the regulations. They are prepared to swear affidavits that they have been kept in continuous solitary confinement, with spare diet every seventh and eighth day. I am informed by them that there are some young men who are serving second and third periods of solitary confinement and one at least has served four periods of solitary confinement, a young married man aged 22.

Why?

Why? For refusing to obey orders. But my point is not that they have been sentenced unjustly or outside the terms of the regulations. My point is not that the officer in charge does not have the right to sentence them further in the detention barracks to solitary confinement and spare diet. My point is that he has been going outside the regulations by keeping them in continuous solitary confinement with spare diet every seventh and eighth day. As I say, these people are prepared to sign affidavits to this effect and I think it is high time that a proper inquiry should be conducted into these complaints to see whether there is in fact justification for what has been told me. Not only are they in continuous solitary confinement but they are also—and this is within the regulations—dented all privileges such as the right to write letters or receive letters or visits from parents. They have had no reading material permitted except the Bible, and as I said earlier on, although not now, pretty primitive conditions of hygiene prevailed.

It is not an hotel, you know.

I know it is not an hotel but perhaps the hon. the Minister will agree with me that certain standards of humanity are also required even in detention barracks. Surely the hon. the Minister could not justify such conditions if they were outside the regulations, which defence headquarters have already spelt out to me in some detail, and which he himself in reply to questions also spelt out to me. My complaint is that the regulations have been infringed and that continuous solitary confinement has been imposed on, these boys. As I say, recently certain improvements have been effected, but certainly as far as the continuous solitary confinement is concerned, I am informed by parents that this is still continuing. What I am asking the hon. the Minister to do is not to accept what I am saying, but equally he should not just glibly accept what he believes to be the truth as told to him by his officers. I believe he should institute an inquiry, and that is all I am asking. There is no need for the hon. the Minister to be so irritated about this. Things happen in every Army throughout the world, things which even people in high places of authority are not aware of, and I think the correct thing to do is to institute an inquiry to see whether there is in fact any justification for the accusations, and if there is, to correct the conditions under which these young men are being held. I cannot take the matter any further, because as I say, the rest of the subject in regard to conscientious objectors and Jehovah’s Witnesses, is the subject of an inquiry. Just as an indication of an attitude which, I feel, is vindictive, let me refer to the following instance. On the 17th March, 22 boys, who were already in D.B. serving a sentence which had been imposed on them as recently as 4th February, were again brought to court and sentenced to a further year’s imprisonment, but not concurrently with the six months’ sentence to which they had already been sentenced and of which they had served only five or six weeks. In other words, they have to serve 18 months in all. This is actually while the Select Committee is sitting. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the member for Houghton made certain statements which one simply cannot allow to pass without comment. The rest of my speech may now have gone by the board, but I am going to reply to her. She referred here to “savage treatment”. What a disgraceful thing it is to say in this House that there is savage treatment in the Defence Force! What proof did she furnish for that statement, except for a lot of gossip repeated to her by people of the kind one does not find in the Defence Force in any case? She referred here to “standards of humanity”. What a disgraceful thing it is to connect this with the Defence Force and with the treatment received in the Defence Force by people who are in detention! This is one of the most reprehensible things I have ever heard being said in this House. She said that the hon. the Minister should not believe his officers. Apparently his officers are unreliable; they are lying to him.

I never said that. I said he should make inquiries.

Wherever the enemies of the State may crop up, there one finds the hon. member for Houghton. Wherever there are people thwarting the interests of the State, there one finds the hon. member for Houghton. I am still waiting for her to say in this House a word of censure about people who massacre others and roast nuns in Port Elizabeth. I am still waiting to see her taking a stand in this House against the cruellest people one has ever come across in the course of history, namely the terrorists fighting against our people in the North. I am waiting for her to say a word of censure about them. I am waiting for her to say a word of censure about child rapists and cannibals in Africa, against whom the struggle for civilization is being waged every day, also by thousands of Black people. I am waiting for her to say a word about Harris and his bomb-throwers on the Johannesburg station.

Where were you when my husband was up North?

Whenever anybody thwarts the State, she is in the forefront. Then she rides the high horse, not like Lady Godiva, but she imagines herself to be a Jeanne d’Arc.

I want to deal with another matter. I know the hon. the Minister has already stated this in this House on several occasions, but it would perhaps be a good thing if the hon. the Minister referred to certain matters repeatedly. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what the Government’s approach is in respect of the military position and approach in Southern Africa on perhaps a broader basis than the one on which he stated it here on a previous occasion. In the second place, I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what the Government’s standpoint is in respect of non-Whites in the South African Defence Force, and the role they have to play in it. I know the hon. the Minister did refer to it before, but I would be grateful if, for the sake of clarity, he would just state to us his standpoint in regard to the matter once again.

I want to refer to the speech which the hon. member for Durban Point made in this House yesterday afternoon. According to his Hansard he used the following words—

The latter part is praiseworthy; I like it very much, but what did the hon. member insinuate by the first part? One of the less intelligent members at the back there is welcome to snigger; it does not worry me. I want to know what the hon. member means by “whatever the provocation, may be”. Who in the Defence Force is exposed to provocation and to what form of provocation? Then he said: “Whatever the bitterness or the hurt may be …” What bitterness is there in the South African Defence Force, and who in the South African Defence Force has been hurt? What is the hon. member referring to? Why does he not tell us in clear language exactly what he means in referring to these things? I want to contrast his attitude in this debate with his attitude earlier this year when I moved a private motion on terrorism and communism, when the hon. member took that opportunity to attack the hon. member for Stellenbosch on a pamphlet. When it was possible for us to hold a thorough discussion on a vital topic, the hon. member took that opportunity to attack the hon. the Minister of Defence on the policy of this side of the House and dragged the Prime Minister into the matter as well. However, it is interesting to note that just one by-election could bring about such a tremendous change of attitude, so much peace and calm in this House. The hon. member owes it to us to tell us where in the South African Defence Force “bitterness and hurt, however deep it may go” are to be found. He should tell us in no uncertain terms who has been hurt. I want to claim that nowhere in the society of South Africa are there better relations between our people than is in fact the case in the South African Defence Force. Furthermore I want to claim that the numerical ratio among the population is reflected precisely in the corps of officers of the Defence Force. I also want to claim that when we come to a matter such as the ratio between Afrikaans- and English-speaking people, we find that in the Defence Force it is just as good, if not better, and I maintain it is better, than it is amongst any other comparable group of people in South Africa. In the South African Defence Force we still have the practise which I learned there years ago, and I understand that this is still the case, namely that one month correspondence is conducted in Afrikaans and the next month again it is conducted in English. Nowhere would one find the same degree of mutual goodwill as is found in the Defence Force. Any hon, member and any person outside who, in referring to the South African Defence Force and saying that bitterness and hatred and hurt people are to be found in it, is doing the Defence Force, not only the Defence Force, but also South Africa, the greatest disservice possible. I want to say this with the greatest emphasis I can muster.

I just want to refer to one matter that was mentioned by the hon. member for North Rand. The hon. member once again expressed the wish for a full-time Permanent Force Brigade. This is a fine thought, and I am sympathetic to the idea that we should have a Permanent Force Brigade, if this is at all practicable. However, I think that the answer was given to the hon. member in this House before, repeatedly. This is simply beyond the means of the South African Defence Force. There are several reasons why this simply cannot be done, irrespective of how convenient and praiseworthy such a brigade would be. In the first place, there is the cost aspect. It would consist of a large number of people who would have to be paid at a high salary scale, who would have to be accommodated and provided with equipment. In the second place, it would mean that a large number of men would have to be withdrawn from the normal man-power pool of South Africa, and at the moment we already have shortages in this regard. Another complaint that we hear very often, is that of boredom, and I want to hasten to add that this is an unfair complaint. However, if one had to maintain a Permanent Force Brigade in readiness for being called up, I want to ask what proportions the boredom factor among those people would assume. How would one occupy them further, after they had been fully trained down to the minutest detail, fully armed and kept in readiness as an effective striking force? This is simply the way it is, and we must accept the fact that with our limited manpower in South Africa we have to rely on making use of volunteers. We are very grateful—the hon. member for Durban Point expressed his gratitude, and I take pleasure in associating myself with it —for the fact that we are leaning heavily on volunteers for duty in our Defence Force and especially in the corps of officers of the Citizen Force. However, it is a fact that the national service system is a system of which we must avail ourselves in the place of a full-time Force as envisaged by the hon. member for North Rand. We must avail ourselves of the national service system, and we shall simply have to accept the fact in South Africa that every citizen will, at some time or other during his lifetime, have to perform military service for South Africa, and that he therefore has a duty to the State and that it must be done. Of course, personally I should like to see our national service system being extended in scope. I should like to see more people being drawn into it. I think that if many of these ducktail monstrosities and long-haired creatures, in respect of whom one cannot tell the males from the females when one sees them in the street, could perform service in the Defence Force from time to time, their looks would at least be a much greater credit to South Africa than they are at the moment [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not really want to respond to the speech made by the hon. member for Middelburg, but I should like to draw the attention of the hon. member for Houghton to the fact that there is legislation before a Select Committee at the moment in regard to the Defence Force. This legislation may make some provision for the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

On behalf of this side of the House I want to express appreciation to the hon. the Minister for the calm and statesmanlike manner in which he has replied in this debate up to now and also for the strong way in which he has put the political agitators on both sides of the political border-line in their place. We appreciate it very much indeed, especially coming from the Minister of Defence, because we believe, as he does, that patriotism and not politics should be the first consideration in the Defence Force.

We want to join him in congratulating Admiral Biermann. In particular I want to extend to him my personal congratulations. I do not know whether he is aware of the fact, but some of the members of his family are resident in my constituency. I also have a son and a young nephew who are doing their national service in the Navy at the moment. So I regard him as a neighbour, and not only in name. We also want to express our appreciation to Prof. Samuels for agreeing to stay on in the Munitions Board for another five years. He is of great value to our Defence Force and we appreciate it very much indeed.

†Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister of Defence spoke about the threat of the communist block to Southern Africa and said that it was in fact a threat by the communist block to the whole of Africa for the control of Africa and, eventually, for the control of Europe and the Western world. He spoke about the world strategy of Communism and said that we would have to look at matters from more than only the military field. I believe that in many ways we will have to look at matters in other fields than only the military field. I believe that we will have to adopt our internal policies and strategies in such a manner that we will be able to counteract this threat. I will elaborate on that point just now. I wonder whether the hon. the Minister and the Department of Defence are aware of the misuse of a psychological practice known as “sensitivity training” or “group therapy” in South Africa at the present time. This is a psychological practice which is based on a Pavlovian theory that was evolved out of experiments with dogs. It was used extensively by the North Koreans in the Korean War to brain-wash prisoners. At the present time it is being used in the commercial world quite a lot in the training of salesmen. There is a great deal of misuse of this practice. I believe that the hon. the Minister should get together with the hon. the Minister of Health and possibly the hon. the Minister of National Education and bring about legislation to control the trainers in this field: because there are so many amateurs that are playing with the minds of people that it can possibly subvert the morals of South Africa. I make it as a suggestion and I hope the hon. the Minister will go further into it.

Then there are, obviously, ideological differences between the parties in South Africa. However, I do believe that both the major parties are conservative in their outlook and that they believe in the continued existence of a Western type of civilization in this, our country, our only country. I believe we should look further into the threat from the Indian Ocean. The communist build-up in the Indian Ocean to my mind and, I believe, to the minds of all our officers and to all members of this hon. House is something of grave concern to us.

If I may, I want to raise something with the Minister which may appear to fall under another Vote. I want to speak to him about the coastal strip between the Fish River and the Keiskamma River, i.e. between the mouth of the Fish River and the Keiskamma River at Hamburg. At the present stage this coastal strip is White and with the consolidation of the Ciskei, the Peddie district becomes part of the released area. None of the farmers in that district want to remain, not even in the coastal strip. When I interviewed the hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education, they asked that they should be taken over. These farmers in the coastal strip have South Africa at heart and they suggested that that strip be taken over either by the Department of Defence, or by the Department of Forestry, or by the Department of Agricultural Credit and Land Tenure. I believe it is important that that coastal strip should be defended. We have numerous commandos in the areas and we have numerous regiments in the area. We have the Sixth South African Infantry Battalion in Grahamstown, the First City Regiment in Grahamstown, the Kaffrarian Rifles in East London, the Alexandria Commando and the Midlands Commando in that area. All these are very proud regiments and they work very well together. Good use could be made of that ground in coastal exercises and I believe instilling the patriotism and the co-operation which is necessary in our Defence Force. I would appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would negotiate with his colleagues in the Department of Bantu Administration and Development with the object of taking over that strip of coast for the purposes of the Defence Force and to use it for the further defence of our eastern seaboard against this threat from the Indian Ocean.

Then I would like to express my thanks to those particular units in the Eastern Cape, and particularly to the Sixth South African Infantry Battalion, for the wonderful work they have done in that area in becoming part of a community. Wherever there is a country show, wherever there is something that is undertaken by the community, this regiment is there. Wherever there is trouble, they are there to help. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to them and to their fellow officers in other neighbouring units for the wonderful work they have done in the Eastern Cape. There are certain little things in respect of which the hon. the Minister could make things easier for these regiments.

I spoke about these little country shows. I believe this is a wonderful place for a Defence Force to go in for public relations with the civilian people around the country-side. At the present time, if they have to travel a distance to a country show, a demonstration, a parade or something like that, they have to pay for their expenses out of regimental funds. I know that money is tight, but I think that that little bit of extra outlay could create such further good relations with the people in the surrounding districts, and, in fact, in the whole of South Africa because every regiment would be doing this, that we would have far less trouble from mothers who cannot cut the umbilical cord when their children go to the army. I believe this is an important factor. It is a small matter, but it is something which I believe the Minister could look into and a matter in which he can assist our regiments. Then, I believe, we should establish a permanent liaison officer between, say, the Department of Public Works and the Department of Defence. I say this, because here, too, you find conflict. I recall an argument between the local inspector of public works and the regiment concerned. They argued about whether a kitchen’s walls should be tiled with three feet or with five feet. I believe that the most hygienic thing is five feet. I know what happened at Grahamstown where the regiment was forced to pay the difference between three feet height of tiles and five feet height of tiles because the Department of Public Works disagreed with them. [Time expired.]

Mr. Speaker, while the hon. member was paying a tribute to the hon. the Minister, I thought of these words of Virgil—

I fear the Greeks, even though they bring gifts. This is all I want to say about that.

Today I want to talk about our nearest neighbouring state, which, as we all know, accommodates terrorists or, at the least, provides terrorists with facilities for operating the way they do now.

Ask Houghton— she will know.

I do not want to speak to the hon. member for Houghton today—I want to enter into a conversation with her great friend, Kaunda. We know one thing, and that is that the Head of State of Zambia—this is what I suspect —would welcome it very much if we were to retaliate on the other side of his border against the terrorist camps and activities there. We know why: This could be seized upon by him as an incident which would be blown up and misrepresented into an act of aggression. In the second place, in that way the brittle UN would be given an injection, and the noise would be overawing. In the third place, it would be seized upon by him and his militant friends to consolidate their shaky position through sobbing, moaning, accusations and distortions about war aggressiveness from the White South. In the fourth place, it would be seized upon by them to strengthen and illuminate further their lack-lustre influence, and especially that of Kaunda, in the Organization of African Unity. He would look for sympathy. It would also be seized upon by him and his economically weak, militant friends as a golden opportunity for diverting the attention from their weak, vulnerable and even languishing economy and focusing all the attention on an imagined war.

What is the position now? This is something they should know. The Republic of South Africa is the super state in Africa. The Republic’s gross national product doubles itself approximately every 10 years. By 1980 our gross national product will be approximately R25 000 million, and by the year 2000 it will be approximately R100 000 million. As this gross national product grows and increases, we shall, with a smaller percentage of expenditure on Defence, nevertheless be able to spend fantastic sums of money on Defence. If one takes the potential economic strength of the Republic of South Africa and projects it into the future, the possibility fades away that Zambia, which is so militant today, will even in a 100 years’ time be able to confront the Republic of South Africa in a military adventure. The hopes which Kaunda places on the Tanzam railway line as a means to increased military and economic mobility, are going to cause him great difficulties. Approximately two weeks ago the leader of the newly established Opposition party in Zambia sounded the warning that that railway line was going to be used by the Red Chinese communists for operating from the new power base which they are developing in Tanzania— a power base they have obtained through political, military and economic interference.

I want to say this: Lusaka is no military lure to the Republic of South Africa, but it is in fact so to the Red Communists. I say this to Kaunda in all friendliness: Through his uncalculated, militant, aggressive policy towards the Republic of South Africa, he is doing two things. In the first place, he is robbing his own people and his own country of the benefits and the development aid in many spheres which may be obtained from a non-aggressive economic giant which is becoming progressively stronger, from one of his nearest neighbouring states. In the second place, he is turning loose in his own country forces which will lead to the overthrow of his already shaky political position and which will turn his own country into a defenceless prey to aggressive communists.

Mr. Chairman, we can all say that the Republic of South Africa has never turned its economic and financial means, its power and resources, into military imperialism. In the second place, it has never offered its economic power and aid in exchange for political domination, neither directly nor indirectly. In the third place, it has never harnassed its military power for the purpose of subjecting any state economically or making it a politico-ideological satellite. This is therefore the message of the Republic of South Africa to Kaunda and the people of Zambia: If you want food, you may come to the Republic of South Africa for negotiations. Bombs will not accompany the bags of maize. Military equipment will not accompany equipment for development purposes. We shall gladly, as good neighbouring states and good neighbours should, send scientists and technical advisers and engineers, but never military experts and training staff. We may tell the people of Zambia that the Republic of South Africa prefers the smoke and the drone of factory chimneys and machines to the thunder of cannon and smoke-filled, burning cities and gunpowder smoke from the barrels of cannons.

This is what we want to say to Kaunda and the people of Zambia—and with this I want to conclude : They should strip Lusaka of the garment it is wearing today as a first base of devilish and satanical forces which it wants to set at the White South by force. In the second place, we ask the people of Zambia to learn the lesson of Jordan, which was harnassed as the first base of terrorists against Israel, and which today finds itself stuck in the grip of terrorism, so much so that it cannot move. In the third place, we say to them : Terrorism and orderly, evolutionary development are irreconcilable with each other in a country where poverty, ignorance and diseases are found, as is the case in these newly emancipated Black states. They are propped up by unprecedented militant nationalism, but whereas disease, ignorance and poverty are found there, the Republic of South Africa stands as a non-aggressive, peace-seeking state, which can be of great value to these states in Africa. This is our message to the people of Zambia.

Mr. Chairman, with the exception of the one single false note by the hon. member for Durban Point, to which the hon. member for Middelburg referred, this debate has taken place in a calm atmosphere up to now. In saying this, I am ignoring the hon. member for Houghton completely.

Sir, I should like to express a word of sincere thanks and appreciation to the hon. the Minister of Defence, and to his officers as well, for the special image they have given to our Defence Force over the past few years. I should like to say that South Africa and every well-meaning citizen of the country are proud of every man and every woman wearing the uniform of our Defence Force. They are wearing it with great distinction, which redounds to South Africa’s credit. But, Sir, we are not only proud; we are also grateful, for their readiness is our insurance for stability and peace in this country.

An important aspect in respect of our Defence Force, which we are inclined to overlook, perhaps because it has not yet become very perceptible, is that compulsory military service is giving our nation of the future a very strong element of discipline and diligence. In a few years’ time, when these young men, in their thousands, will have reached full maturity and hold responsible positions, these characteristics of self-discipline and diligence will come forward very strongly.

South Africa, more so than any other country, if it wants to maintain its position of leadership in Africa, will find the characteristics of discipline and diligence indispensable. If we look to the north, we see here on our threshold a mighty continent, a continent which has already awakened, a continent where the characteristics of diligence and discipline have become a clarion call and, I want to say, have been elevated to a virtue, and quite rightly so. It is a continent where the ordered character of youth organizations with inspiration and enthusiasm has become so striking that even our own esteemed State President, on the occasion of his recent visit to Malawi in March, commended it highly. Sir, we should make no mistake; these virtues of diligence and discipline will become more and more evident amongst the youth of Africa, and if these are combined with the skill of technology and science, industry and commerce, knowledge and experience, and if the full development of black nationalism, of patriotism and national pride is added, it makes me feel uneasy to think that, in contrast, a large part of South Africa’s youth are arranging pop festivals, becoming hippies and using drugs.

This is the background against which I want to make the following request to the hon. the Minister for his consideration. I should like to ask him whether it is not possible to have an investigation made into the possibility of subjecting gradually the young women of our country to some form of compulsory national service over a period. What I have in mind, is compulsory training in at least the techniques of nursing and civil defence. I foresee that the civil defence division may act as a coordinating body, and will be able to work out such a scheme for such training in conjunction with the Departments of Defence and Health, our Provincial Administrations, the Noodhulpliga, the Red Cross and the St. John Ambulance Association. The way I see it, is that compulsory training in our hospitals of our young women as nurses, should take place in accordance with the extent to which accommodation is available in our hospitals, just as is the case at present with our national servicemen in the accommodation available at our various military installations.

Here I want to say just in passing that such a scheme—this is not the main object of my speech—will also be able to meet the chronic shortage of nurses, for I believe that once these young women have done compulsory service in hospitals for one year, they will eventually choose nursing as a career.

The balance of our young women, i.e. those who cannot be accommodated in our hospitals in this manner, should, for a few weeks per year over a period that may be determined, just as is the case at present in our Commando system, undergo compulsory training in nursing and first aid at the various branches of our Noodhulpliga, the Red Cross and the St. John Ambulance Association. Of course, the question that arises immediately is where we shall find the instructors to give the necessary instruction to this large number of newcomers to compulsory service, with the possible exception of our hospitals where the available staff may give the necessary training to these young ladies. But, Sir, the answer for the rest is actually very easy, thanks to the far-sightedness of the hon. the Minister of Defence. These female leaders are already being produced by the Civil Defence College in George.

Sir, in passing I just want to say here that I believe that these young ladies will yet become the pride of our nation’s future mothers one day.

Sir, one single training college of this nature is not sufficient at all. At this early stage already there are more applications for admission than the number that can be admitted. One such college cannot produce enough female leaders for the purposes of the scheme which I have submitted to the hon. the Minister for his consideration, and therefore I believe that the establishment of more colleges of this nature is a matter of top priority. In fact, through the hon. the Minister of Defence I want to make an urgent and serious appeal to the Government for positive steps to be taken to make a start with planning for the establishment of at least another one or two or even three such training colleges at places where they may be located conveniently so that the services of the present staff of the Defence Force may be used. Sir, the circumstances in which we are living make it absolutely essential for us to give serious attention to this aspect of compulsory training for our young ladies. I want to go so far as to say that our duty towards the young people in order that they, in turn, may in future do their duty towards our country and our nation, is making an urgent appeal to us to give serious attention to this matter. Therefore I want to ask that our responsibility towards the young people and their responsibility towards our country and our nation should be the final factor which we shall take into consideration in deciding to give attention to the establishment of more colleges such as the one available at George at the moment, for the purpose of bringing in young ladies more extensively with a view to their performing compulsory service in some form or other.

The hon. member for Carletonville has made an interesting approach to our neighbouring states not to support the establishment of terrorist camps. He was in fact warning these states that they themselves might be engulfed by the very terrorism which they are fomenting against other countries. He is quite right. There is an old saying that he who rides the tiger will find that he cannot dismount, and that may well be so in the case of some heads of state who are assisting in the development of terrorist training camps.

As far as the hon. member for Odendaalsrus is concerned, I do hope that his plea will fall on deaf ears. I would hate to think that we in this country may find it necessary to institute a system of national service for the women of this country. I believe, and we accept, that it is necessary for some training for service to be done by women, as is being done at the college at George, to provide for civil defence. But I am sure that we in this country can still look to the women to serve as volunteers in organizations like the Red Cross, St. Johns and other such organizations in the case of any conflagration in South Africa, or in case their services are needed in an emergency. There is no doubt that we in South Africa are extremely fortunate in the readiness of our people to defend their homeland. I think it is essential therefore that we should not allow any frustration to creep into the organization of our defence or to allow any legitimate grievance to arise which will adversely affect that readiness. When I look at the position in regard to the S.A. Coloured Corps I wonder whether we are not at this stage perhaps perpetuating a cause of grievance which should really be eliminated. The Coloured South Africans have a very proud military history. They served in World War I with distinction in battle in various parts of Africa and in World War II they served as non-combatants. There are many White ex-servicemen today who owe their lives to the courage and bravery of the Coloureds who served as stretcher bearers, many of whom were decorated for bravery. According to the estimates before us, at page 100, the establishment for the S.A. Coloured Corps totals 572. From the reply to a question placed on the Order Paper by the hon. member for North Rand, it appears that of that establishment at the present time there are vacancies for 78 posts in the Army and the S.A. Medical Corps and 95 posts in the Navy, a total of 173 posts, or 32 per cent of the total establishment, which have not been filled. I believe that this may be due, and I have reason to believe that it is true, to the salary discrimination which applies in so far as the S.A. Coloured Corps is concerned, as compared with the other arms of the Service. We find from the Estimates that whereas the Coloured Corps is restricted to a salary scale from R840 minimum to a maximum of R2 640, the White personnel of our armed forces have a starting scale of R1 110, going up to a maximum of R5 400 for other ranks. By comparison, the commencing salary for the Coloured Corpos is only 60 per cent of the commencing salary for the White personnel and the maximum salary for those below officer rank, including warrant officers and noncommissioned officers, is approximately 50 per cent of the maximum salary of White warrant officers and non-commissioned officers. I believe it is a cause for non-attraction, if I may put it that way, into the Force of Coloured persons, and I hope that the Public Service Commission and the Supreme Command will be able to revise that salary scale very soon. I believe it is necessary and justified and I hope it will be done without delay.

The second point I wish to raise is the fact that the global communist threat—I refer to it as a global threat because it is directed at the West—requires a calm assessment of the facts in so far as South Africa is concerned, and that that assessment can only be made on reliable intelligence and the correct assessment of that intelligence in regard to its military value. I believe that our ability to deal with this threat is dependent upon calm leadership in our Defence Forces. There has been a remarkable number of veterans of World War II who have remained on on a voluntary basis in the Defence Force of South Africa in the various arms. One is amazed to find, even at this stage, 27 years after the end of hostilities, that there are still men serving in a voluntary capacity in the regiments in South Africa which served during the last war. Their numbers are decreasing. We must realize now that we have reached the transition and that there will be fewer and fewer, and possibly very soon no ex-servicemen who have had war service will be serving in our Defence Force. They have undoubtedly, under the guidance of the Supreme Command and senior officers of the Defence Force, established a deep loyalty to regimental traditions in the various arms in which they have served. I think we in South Africa can be extremely proud of the quality and the dedication of those men who now serve in the capacity of commanding officers, warrant officers and non-commissioned officers in our various Defence Force units.

I hope that one matter will be kept constantly in mind, namely that by the encouragement of regimental associations, the encouragement of what are virtually old boys’ associations of the various regiments, there will always be the opportunity for those who have served to be able to work with and to encourage those who are serving at the present time. I believe those facilities are there. I also agree with the hon. member for Durban Point that regimental spirit and esprit de corps in the forces in South Africa would be greatly strengthened if the continuous training periods were condensed into a shorter period than at the present time. In other words, there will be more frequent occasions on which the regiments are together when the men will get to know each other and when, apart from the military aspects of training, they could also begin indulging in sporting and other activities as an entity. I hope that this matter will be carried further and, if found possible, that it will restore the old contact when whole regiments are together more frequently than under the present system spread over so many years.

Finally, I want to congratulate the editorial staff on the publication of Paratus. I think it is a publication of extremely high quality. It is also an extremely interesting one. I would like to suggest, if I may, that from the point again of esprit de corps and background, that perhaps a series of articles could be published in that magazine on the background and history of battle honours which are held by various regiments in South Africa. This could help motivate a greater esprit de corps in the regiments of long standing in this country.

Tell us about the woman soldiers.

I am not certain, Mr. Chairman, what the hon. member for South Coast has in mind. As far as I am concerned, I am opposed to women being conscripted into the forces. I think they should be there voluntarily. If he is referring to Scottish Regiments of South Africa in a disparaging way, I can say that I am still pleased to find that they hold a place of honour on every parade in South Africa.

I have an article here in my hand which deals with national service. The author of this article describes national service as an “obvious waste of labour”. He goes on to say (translation)—

I mention the matter because I think it has become necessary once again for the hon. the Minister to tell South Africa why we have national service in this country, why it was instituted, why the Government decided to institute national service after the Groenewoud committee of 1965, after the report of a Select Committee in 1967 and after missions overseas. I find it a pity that this person found it necessary in this publication—the mouthpiece of a large organization in South Africa—to disparage our system of national service in this way. It is perhaps necessary for the hon. the Minister once again to tell these people, and South Africa as well, why we have this system of national service. Such a system is not only aimed at military preparedness, but also at ensuring viability in all spheres of life. I should like to discuss another matter here today.

†Mr. Chairman, I was shocked and disgusted when I read recently that there is a movement initiated by the United. Nations Human Rights Commission to persuade the International Committee of the Red Cross to give to the so-called freedom fighters in Africa and in other countries the status of soldiers by way of an amendment by treaty to the Geneva Convention. This Red Cross convention is to meet next month in Geneva. At this meeting they will decide what to do about this suggestion. In this regard I want to quote a well-known person in Europe, namely Dr. Clemens Amelunxen, a judge of the high court in Germany, a member of the International Police Association as well as an honorary member of the Institute of Foreign and Comparative Law of the University of South Africa. What did he say? He said the following about this proposal I have just mentioned—

This is what this professor said. Until now, as far as I can remember, no Government has ever formally requested that terrorist forces be accorded the protection of the Geneva Convention or be treated as prisoners of war. I wish to say, Sir, that in not one single respect can modern-day terrorism, such as is conducted by terrorists in Africa and in other parts of the world, be justified in terms of international law. To change existing international law to accommodate these terrorists would be, I believe Sir, to strike at the very roots of the sovereignty of states. It would simply mean that terrorism will be legalized by an international society such as the Red Cross. I mention these facts to plead with the Minister to use his influence to persuade our friends in the Western world to squash this attempt by certain people to accord to terrorists the status of soldiers. We cannot allow this, and we cannot afford it. We cannot allow that the very principles of international law governing conflicts be violated in this way. I do think, Sir, that if this should be allowed in Southern Africa, it could spell disaster.

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Worcester will pardon me if I do not follow him in the argument he has expounded. I do not want to comment on it, except to say that I think he has a good case. I also want to extend my sincere congratulations to Admiral Biermann on his first appearance in this debate. I subscribe to everything that has already been said in this connection by both sides of the House.

I should like to discuss two matters with the hon. the Minister. The first is a matter which has already been mentioned by the hon. member for Durban Point. Actually I am glad that the hon. the Minister has not yet responded to that aspect of his speech. I am now referring to the period of service which is spread over ten years at the moment. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister, and this is what the hon. member for Durban Point also did, to consider reducing the period from ten years to four years.

A Bill has just been referred to a Select Committee after the Second Reading.

I should like the hon. the Minister to consider this matter. He said that he would reply to it. I believe that under the old set-up it was possible for officers to sign on for a longer period before accepting a commission. I believe that it is a good system for serving officers in the Defence Force to stay on for a longer period than the other ranks, because one likes to have continuity of command. In that way you can also keep up a standard for a regiment, something you find very difficult to do if your officers and non-commissioned officers keep changing. I do feel that the ten-year period is a very long period for the ordinary man in the Defence Force, because he gets out of practice, in any case, during the long period between his continuous periods of training. This is not the case with officers, of course, since the introduction of the good system of the annual leadership group training for officers. Since that was introduced we have had a very good position in respect of the training of officers. There is a further problem, however, which the hon. member for Durban Point did not mention, and that is that with this system of ten year training the regiments are becoming very large. The regiments become very large, because for ten years they keep getting new people who have completed their training period of nine months, while almost no one leaves the regiment. This causes several administrative problems because of the administration within a regiment is largely undertaken on a part-time basis by the officers and non-commissioned officers of the regiment. If possible, they have to give up one night a week from their own time in order to undertake this administrative work. From experience I know that it is often difficult to keep such an administration up to date and 100 per cent correct, as it should be. This is one of the problems which I should like to put to the hon. the Minister and which I should like to submit to him for his consideration. In time this leads to an infantry company with five to six platoons, as I have seen it happen myself. Otherwise you even have to establish an Echo company in a regiment.

Then there is another matter to which I should like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention. The hon. the Minister said very clearly in his speech in this House what his attitude is towards politics within the Defence Force. I am delighted at the attitude he assumed in that regard. He said here that as long as he was Minister of Defence he would keep politics out of the Defence Force. I think that is a praiseworthy attitude and therefore I should like to bring certain matters to his notice. I do not know whether the hon. the Minister is aware of them, but I should like to bring these matters to his notice, particularly in the light of what he has just said here. I am talking about a deliberate propagation of the Government’s relationships policy within the Defence Force. I am talking specifically about a case of which I have personal experience, not something which I am basing on hearsay evidence. In the instance to which I am referring I was personally present at a leadership group training course on our northern borders. Several years ago they introduced a special division into our Defence Force, a division which also employs ethnologists. The ethnologist gave a lecture before the leadership group, a lecture which was very valuable. It was very valuable because he told us about the people living on the border there and about the Bantu population there. He told us what their customs were, how they should be treated, and so forth. It was very valuable, but what was not valuable was when he started to give us a pseudoscientific explanation of the policy of separate development of this Government.

Why do you call it “pseudo”?

That is what I want to know now. This hon. member now says that it is quite right, but there is not, after all, a political platform within the Defence Force. Even if that hon. members believes that it is right, and I know he believes that his policy is right, it does remain a contentious matter in South Africa and one would not want to see such a contentious matter raised in a lecture before members of the Defence Force and then discussed at length. I asked that officer a few pertinent questions and I can assure the House that his case seemed considerably less convincing after I had asked those questions. [Interjections.] But however that may be, I had this experience before I came to this hon. House. The reason why I have never mentioned it before is that one does not want to mention an isolated case and then make a fuss about it. But my information is that this sort of thing is still going on. I want to know from the hon. the Minister whether he has heard of similar instances before, and, if so what he is going to do or has done about it. I should like to ask him why it is that such a person could be allowed to propagate a policy in such a way at that stage. I do not think it is something which we want within the Defence Force.

But it is national policy.

No, it is not national policy; it is Government policy. If the hon. the Minister agrees with these hon. members. I should be very glad to hear it. I do not believe it is his policy to do so. I am just telling him that this was my experience, and I should just like to know what his attitude in this regard is and whether his policy in respect of the Defence Force is that politics may be propagated there, or not. That is all.

Give an example.

I have given the example.

But give the particular words which the person used.

But I have just told the hon. House what the purport of his words was.

That was your interpretation.

No, he said it in so many words. He began by asking whether we knew to what extent the policy of separate development of this Government was based on purely scientific grounds. From there he elaborated and tried to explain how the matter fits together scientifically. Let there be no illusions about this matter. One would like to know the hon. the Minister’s attitude in this regard. I hope he will investigate this matter and take very strong action in regard to it. I also hope that if further cases of this nature were to occur, he would take positive action to prevent it, because it is most certainly not the policy of this side of the House ever to allow something of this nature within the Defence Force. If something like this were to happen when we are in power, I hope that hon. members on that side of the House, when it comes to their notice, will also bring it to our notice in the same way as I am now doing.

Mr. Chairman. I want to say to the hon. member for Florida that he has not been told the half of it. What I mean by no politics in the Defence Force is, in the first place, that every member of the Defence Force is entitled to his own convictions regarding the political division in the country, as long as he does not misuse his position in uniform in regard to some other person who differs with him and, in the second place, that there will be no discrimination against persons on the grounds of their political convictions as long as they do not misuse their position. Let me tell the hon. member that we are engaged in a system of citizenship training. As long as this Government is governing, its policy is State policy. It is the duty of every officer to acouaint himself with the policy of the State, for he may have to defend that policy. What else does the hon. member want?

He wants traitors.

Communism will not be allowed in the Defence Force, although we teach them what communism means. We teach them the methods of terrorists; we teach them the tactics of terrorism. After all, an officer is not a person who must be ignorant. Does the hon. member want our officers to live in a vacuum? This has never been the case. Under previous governments officers were kept properly informed of what was expected of them as representatives of the State. I cannot see the hon. member’s point at all. I think he has deviated from the point completely. We shall continue to give citizenship training within the Defence Force; we shall continue to do so in an objective way. I adopt the standpoint again that there shall be no discrimination on the grounds of politics against a person who holds other opinions, as long as that person does not misuse his party-political convictions in order to discriminate against others. I hope that is clear now. If it is not clear the hon. member will just have to come to see me so that I can explain it to him.

The hon. member for Houghton again raised the question of the Jehovah’s Witnesses this afternoon. I do not want to go too deeply into the matter because it is one, certain aspects of which are being considered by a Select Committee. In any case, I do not want to spend too much time on the hon. member for Houghton; I told her the other day where I place her. I place her, together with her party, in the position of champions of all those who contravene laws and who want to create chaos in South Africa, of all those who want to commit crimes against the State.

I am not interested in what …

She need not be interested in it, but she will listen to me now, for I listened to her. If she does not want to listen to me, she can go and drink a cup of coffee. I want to tell the hon. member that I accept the advice and the word of those who are in charge of the Jehovah’s Witnesses who are at present in detention. Let me now inform the hon. members that there are not only Jehovah’s Witnesses in detention. There are at the moment more or less 56 such Jehovah’s Witnesses in detention, and about 40 members of other denominations, for other reasons. I find that these Jehovah’s Witnesses have a pernicious influence on the others who are in detention. I now want to mention a few examples to her. I know that she will not appreciate it. She cannot appreciate such things; she has ranged herself on the side of all those who want to break the law.

It is absolute nonsense, and you know it.

Sir, I want to quote to you the kind of things these people get up to, these so-called “holy” witnesses of Jehova. They are not denomination; they are lawbreakers. They are people who evade their duty. That is what they are. They are not people with proper conscientious objections, like other people. The other people with conscientious objections subject themselves to the laws of this country. Although they do not want to do national service, they do other work. They work in the hospitals; they conduct themselves in a respectable and sensible manner. But what do these people do? I quote—

But just listen to this—I am only reading extracts—

They disturb other people at their worship services; these are the holy people for whom she has taken up the cudgels. They kick up a row when they are not supposed to. They provoke the authorities in those detention barracks until the nerves of these people are on edge. I have a long report here from the Superintendent. I have a report given to me by the Chief of the Defence Force, after thorough consideration. On 30th March, 1972, three of them complained that they were receiving insufficient physical exercise. This matter was remedied, immediately after they had complained. One other member was not satisfied with the medical officer’s treatment of his complaint about having a sore back. Arrangements were then made for him to see a medical officer again, and no further complaints were made by him. The steps taken are strictly in accordance with the prescribed regulations, and those are my instructions. However, I can understand that the people dealing with them are also human beings, and I am prepared to accept that these responsible persons who have been put in charge of them are decent people. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses would display a little co-operation, they would be better off.

If their continuous solitary confinement …

Sir, the hon. member can shout as much as she likes. I want to tell her this: Before a detainee is placed in solitary confinement or on spare diet a doctor has to certify that he is fit to undergo punishment. Only then is that punishment imposed on him. Solitary confinement for a detainee comprises the following: He is locked up alone in a cell, but he is not deprived of his bedding and the necessary clothing. He is not compelled to do any physical or other labour, service or training, but I think he has to do a few exercises. It will do him good if he gets a little exercise and religion as well—the true religion. He is obliged to keep his cell, clothing and person clean and neat. They keep their Bibles. They can read their Bibles. He is provided with the rations to which he is entitled in his cell. He is not allowed to smoke, or purchase anything, or receive any visitor except for a chaplain or his legal representative. He is visited at least once a day in his cell by a member of the staff, and as frequently as necessary by the medical officer. Those are all steps which we take.

Sir, the officers of the Defence Force are not a lot of thugs. I will not allow the hon. member to imply this when she talks about the Defence Force. She can settle it with her friends outside. She represents all those people who break laws and want to banish order.

Mr. Chairman, is the hon. the Minister entitled to accuse me of being on the side of criminals?

Order! I do not think the hon. the Minister should go as far as that.

Well, Sir, then I shall go almost as far.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that the hon. the Minister be made to withdraw that remark. It is unparliamentary.

Then I want to put it like this. Let me explain what I mean. I have never yet heard that hon. member taking up the cudgels for people who have to maintain law and order here. I have only heard her taking up the cudgels for those who destroy law and order.

Order!

But, Sir, surely it is a fact; how can I withdraw it?

Order! I want to request the hon. the Minister to withdraw the allegation that the hon. member represents those who disrupt law and order.

She does not represent them; she represents the Progressive Party, which acts on their behalf.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that the hon. the Minister be made to withdraw …

Order! I am in the Chair. The hon. member may safely leave that to me. I asked the hon. the Minister to withdraw those words.

Sir, I did withdraw them.

The hon. Minister may proceed.

I say that she represents the Progressive Party in this Parliament, and the Progressive Party outside this Parliament are the champions of all those who disrupt law and order.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Minister has …

Order! The hon. member must raise the matter on a point of order.

Well, I do raise a point of order, Sir. By implication the hon. the Minister has simply repeated the unparliamentary statement he made earlier … [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Sir with that I have disposed of the hon. member. Now I just want to tell her this, it is for the information of the House as well: I am discussing with the Chiefs of the Defence Force whether we should separate those who have been placed in detention, because they have acted in a certain way as Jehovah’s Witnesses, from those who are in detention for other reasons. We are going to put them apart, completely removed from the existing detention barracks. I want to give notice to this effect this afternoon, for we cannot allow the Jehovah’s Witnesses in South Africa to get out of hand as they got out of hand in Europe. Let me mention. Germany as an example. Recently I had another opportunity of discussing this matter with a prominent person from Germany. Originally there were 10 000 posts established for Jehovah’s Witnesses in other undertakings and companies and in State departments. Do you know, Sir, this number grew to more than 25 000 posts, because every Tom, Dick and Harry suddenly became a Jehovah’s Witness. Sir, they are not an ordinary sect; they are not a religious group adhering to a specific religious conviction. Everyone is his own minister and everyone interprets the Bible in his own way—more or less like the Progressive Party.

You have not yet answered the points I raised in connection with solitary confinement.

Sir, we are going to separate them from the other people. I shall not allow officers to be unnecessarily slandered. I went out of my way to go into this matter in collaboration with the Commandant-General, and in collaboration with the Chief of the Army. I have reports before me which convince me that they are an impossible group that is trying to do anything possible to break the rules and regulations, even while in detention. That is all I want to say to the hon. member.

So there is no continuous solitary confinement?

Order!

Sir, I shall not allow them to be maltreated. The hon. member need not be afraid of that. She should object instead to the maltreatment freedom-loving people have to endure in communist camps. Let her rise for a change and protest against that. [Interjections.] Let her rise for a change and protest against what is happening in Zambia. Let her rise for a change and protest against what is happening under her friend Nyerere.

I live here, not in Zambia.

Yes, Sir, but she travels around there. She lives here in freedom, and she slanders South Africa. Sir, I think we must now proceed with responsible party representatives.

You are a vicious man.

The hon. member for North Rand raised the question of civil defence. I find now that I gave a reasonably full elucidation of the whole matter of civil defence here in Parliament last year on 6th May. This was with reference to a speech made by the hon. member for Green Point.

†I think the hon. member will remember my reply. I stated that I was glad that he had raised the matter, and then I continued (Hansard, Volume 34, Column 6161):

Then I went on to explain to the hon. member the whole approach we have to enable local authorities, city councils and the commandos, and auxiliary services like the Red Cross, the Noodhulpliga and St. John’s Ambulance Organization, to participate in a civil defence effort.

*Now, I can inform the hon. member that we held talks with the Red Cross, the Noodhulpliga and St. John’s, and all of them are basically responsible for civil defence. After the women who are undergoing training at the Civil Defence College in George, leave the college, they are bound, on a voluntary basis, to help with the rendering of our civil defence services. We try to encourage them to join these voluntary organizations, and to play a leading role in them. In the second place, each of these three organizations was in the past responsible to the Surgeon-General for providing 200 ambulance attendants and 200 male nurses for emergencies, for which each received a subsidy of R3 000. For civil defence all three were involved in a country-wide training programme to educate the general public, at a remuneration, in first aid. As a result of the incorporation of civil defence in the Defence Force, and as a result of the new reorganizations, all three still remain primarily responsible for civil defence services, in collaboration with city councils, from whom we have had a wonderful response. Hundreds of local authorities have already joined this scheme. But the Red Cross and St. John’s Ambulance, apart from their obligations to the Defence Force, have other obligations as well. They have obligations to the Railways and to the mines, but they also have obligations to the Surgeon-General, and for that they receive subsidies. Then, in addition, the International Red Cross receives a subsidy from the State, which we pay. We have now gone further and arranged with the Noodhulpliga that they will not be attached to the Surgeon-General, but specifically to Civil Defence only. In other words, we do not want all three to be attached to the Surgeon-General. They are attached to Civil Defence. The Noodhulpliga will retain its identity and independence. This organization retains its existing uniforms, badges and badges of rank —we are leaving that severely alone—but its members will wear the Civil Defence badge as a cap badge, as an indication that it is an auxiliary organ of Civil Defence, while the other two are attached to the Surgeon-General section. St. John’s has agreed to increase its existing obligations to the Surgeon-General to 300 ambulance beds and 300 male nurses, for which it will receive an increased annual allowance. The South African Red Cross Association does not see its way clear to extending its existing obligation to the Surgeon-General, but is prepared, within its means, to render assistance to the Surgeon-General as well as to the Civil Defence without remuneration. Its allowance therefore remains unchanged. But we have again increased the allowance to the International Red Cross, as hon. members can see in the Estimates. In other words, we have done away with mass training. We are concentrating on establishing an organization through these auxiliary organizations, through training leaders and through involving the local authorities, and I think that this has worked well. During the Ceres disaster and the floods in East London, and recently in the Gamtoos Valley, we saw that this new system acquitted itself well of its task under very difficult circumstances, and I think that we will achieve the right results if we continue in this way. Further to that I refer the hon. member to what I said here in the House last year.

The hon. members for Durban Point and Florida raised the question of the Citizen Force here. Sir, we have again considered the whole question of the 10 years. I asked the Supreme Command personally to give me the assurance that they are unable to devise any other plan. But, Sir, as the hon. member for North Rand was quite right in saying, South Africa does not have a substantial force. In the second place we must achieve a certain battle order within a certain time. If we reduce the period to four years, then we are not going to achieve that object. It has been scientifically proved that this period cannot be reduced, and if the hon. member wants it I shall have a lecture read to him on this subject with tables, and with the necessary proof that his theory will fail if this period is reduced [Interjection.] No, one cannot do it. The hon. member is already advocating that I should not only call them up in unit context every three years, but that we should do it sooner, and we are now going to do it every two years. But, Sir, one is then going to come to a dead-end after the fifth or the sixth year, and one is then going to have a Force which one cannot use. This is quite simply the case; it does not work out as the hon. member thinks it will. Sir, with our limited instructors’ corps and with our limited man-power, do you not think the Defence Force would grab at something of this nature if it were possible for it to achieve its objective with the proposal made by the hon. member? It may become possible in future; I do not know, but let us go slowly at first. We have now, by a resolution of this House, which passed the Second Reading of that Bill, reduced the training period in the commandos, which we are now able to control better, to 10 years. Let us now leave this 10 year story alone; I think it causes confusion among our people. The present period has to do with the question of the number of forces in fighting trim; it has to do with the numbers of the Force one is building up. I assure the hon. member that if it becomes practicable, if we can devise a plan, we will consider it, but it is not practical at the moment. The hon. member must take my word for it. I am prepared to have this proved to him, as they proved it to me. Is the hon. member prepared to accept my proposal?

Yes, I should very much like to look at it, for I think it is possible.

I have already indicated that we shall try to have exercises take place every second year and not every third year, as in the past.

That means six years therefore?

Yes. As the hon. member knows, the geography of our country makes the maintenance of regiments difficult. One member of a regiment may be in South-West Africa, the other one here, and another there. I do not want to lay it down as policy today, but we are considering whether our Citizen Force regiments should not to a greater extent be made up in our densely populated areas, in the rural areas and in the cities, and then the other members in the more sparsely-populated areas can be grouped together in the commandos, on a district basis now that we are bringing commando training into line with that of the Citizen Force. This is not yet the policy, but we are considering the matter.

The hon. member also referred to the weekly parades. Sir, this is not a necessity, and it is not our policy. If commanders do it, then they are doing it unnecessarily. Those few days on which they can be called up, as laid down in the Act, are in fact meant for special occasions such as the Opening of Parliament or ceremonial parades. It is not necessary for them to be called up every week.

Once every month.

Even that is not necessary. They must find special occasions for that.

The hon. member went further and said that there had been large-scale resignations. Sir, I do not think that there have been large-scale resignations. I have the figures here. From 1st April, 1971 to 31st March, 1972 92 officers resigned from the Citizen Force, from the Army, and the increase was 60. Those are not large-scale resignations. Take the Air Force. I am told that there was one resignation. In the Navy, five officers resigned. In other words, in the Army, the Air Force and the Navy there were altogether 97 resignations. These are not large-scale resignations. There were no resignations of men from the Army.

Are these the volunteer officers?

No, I am referring to resignations from the Citizen Force now. I am talking about professional, expert, extended service officers of the Citizen Force, during the period 1st April, 1971 to 31st March, 1972. These did not therefore take place on such a large scale. We have taken steps to ensure that the young officers whom we are training at Heidelberg do not lose their commission appointments when they return to their units. I think the hon. member knows about that. It is a good principle. Now one is able in that way to utilize the services of those people in occupying positions.

The hon. member then referred to remuneration. I can only say that I am a little surprised to hear that our remuneration is not what it should be. On 1st January of last year I introduced large-scale improvements in the remuneration, in the daily allowance of commando officer and men, and Citizen Force officers and men, and in the dependants’ allowance. This was announced, and is available to the hon. members. These were adjusted to the salaries of Permanent Force personnel. The minimum salaries of Permanent Force personnel were used as a basis. A permanent Force member still has to pay house-rent. This was deducted because these Citizen Force and commando officers and men receive free accomodation, with the result that we cannot allow them that additional amount for house-rent as well. But they were adjusted, so as to compare properly and favourably with those of the Permanent Force personnel. Therefore, they cannot complain about that at present. As a responsible member of the Cabinet I cannot, at this stage, tell the hon. member that we are now going to increase the salaries and allowances of the Permanent Force, the Citizen Force and the commandos out of proportion to the rest of the Public Service. Surely there has to be a correlation. Surely I cannot go to the Minister of Finance and say that he must favour the Defence Force. What about the Police, and what about the Prisons Service? Surely there has, at least, to be a correlation. But in all reasonableness I do want to say that I think one has to admit that the salaries and the allowances which are being paid in the Permanent Force and the Citizen Force today, including those of the Commandos as well, compare favourably, and are reasonable under the prevailing circumstances. With that I am not saying that they cannot be improved. They may perhaps be improved in future.

The hon. members for Middelburg and Green Point referred to the question of Coloured persons in the Defence Force. In the first instance, let me say that, as you know, the S.A. Coloured Corps is a Permanent Force unit. I do not think we have had all the success we should have had with the recruiting for the Coloured Corps. The Government is giving its attention to this matter. I think we must consider the matter and I shall discuss it with my colleague, the Minister of Coloured Affairs, and with the Executive of the Coloured Persons Representative Council, to see whether we should not gradually proceed to establish a special service battalion on a voluntary basis for the Coloureds, and then give the members of this service battalion training for 10 to 12 months and then draw from among their number for the Permanent Force, particularly for the Navy and the Army, where there are certain posts in which we can conveniently utilize their services; and that we use the rest, if we succeed in this—I say that it has to happen gradually; we cannot begin all at once with a few thousand, because we do not have the instructors, and we shall have to train them as instructors—to increase the numbers of that service battalion gradually so that it can comply with the requirements of our eventual demands for mobilization.

But on a voluntary basis.

Yes, on a voluntary basis; and if this succeeds, I have no doubt that we can go further and can apply the same principle, particularly in Natal in respect of the Indians, that we can also establish something of this nature there and in particular utilize the services of part of the Indians at Salisbury Island, where we will have the buildings available in which to accommodate them. I think we can in this way bring considerable relief in certain caderes in the Defence Force where vacancies exist. The Government is giving its attention to this matter. The hon. member for Green Point referred to the question of remuneration. I asked that the figures be sent to me, and I have just received them. Considerable improvements were effected in April 1972 in respect of the members of the Coloured Corps. Under the old scale a warrant officer, class 1, received R1 740 × 90 − 2 640. This is now R1 920 × 120−2 880 × 240.

Then the figures I was working on, in the Estimates, were not correct?

These are only since October 1971. There was a substantial increase in salaries. This is a general improvement which has been effected as part of the improvements for the other Coloured State employees.

Then, the hon. member for Middelburg raised a further matter, i.e. our standpoint in regard to the military position in Southern Africa, in co-operation with other states. In order to prevent any misunderstanding. I think I must say a few words about this. I have stated in this Parliament that we will, in the first place, ensure that the idea of co-operation with other neighbouring states in Southern Africa is also taken further in the sphere of security. Let me mention two examples now. The Prime Minister has already stated that we are prepared to conclude a non-aggression pact with any state in Africa, with any state which wants to conclude one with us. That is the first point in our programme. The second is that we are not a threat to any Africa state. We are not even a threat to Zambia. She is herself responsible for any threats there may be because she has enslaved herself to the Chinese Communists, but she has nothing to fear on our part. If she leaves us in peace, we shall also leave her in peace. Thirdly, up to the present and for the foreseeable future. I said, the defence of our country is reserved for the Republic of South Africa, including our Bantu homelands. Let us just consider this matter for a moment. Can you imagine a period, in our lifetime, or in the lifetime of our children, in which it will be possible for one of our Bantu homelands, or even for Lesotho or Botswana, to maintain a durable, effective air force?

It may happen.

Yes, it may happen, but then only with assistance from outside, and then they will also have to get their pilots and navigators from outside, and their ground staff as well. The same applies to Bantu areas situated along the coast. Not in our lifetime, and not in the lifetime of our children, will they be able to maintain an expensive Navy. Sir, to maintain a navy is not child’s play. South Africa is experiencing this, and we do not even have a very large Navy, but even now we are paying through the nose for it. To maintain a Navy is not child’s play. In other words, I am entitled to conclude that for generations to come the protection of the air space in Southern Africa, south of the Limpopo—let us first discuss that area— must be in the hands of the Republic of South Africa, (a) because we do not want to be a threat to anyone and (b) because our strong air force also guarantees the safety of neighbouring states. In the second place, our Navy guarantees safety along our coasts. The hon. members may ask: What about territorial defence? here we have the example of Lesotho, which is itself an independent state, but which is trying to maintain its territorial defence with a “police mobile force”. She is doing so because there is no threat to her on our part, and because she needs this for internal peace and order. The same applies to our Bantu homelands as well. If they do not want to spend money unnecessarily they will begin modestly, perhaps in the sphere of the police service, to ensure their internal peace and security.

But I want to go further by saying that we have never said that we in Southern Africa will sit back so that Communism can infiltrate without our doing anything about it. That we have never said. In regard to the possible emancipation of homelands we have always adopted the attitude that emancipation or independence is not something which happens overnight, except by way of a revolution, and if it takes place through negotiation and deliberation one will, in one’s discussions, request certain mutual guarantees. One of these will be non-aggression pacts. The other will be that one will not allow communist aggressors to use one’s territory as a base for attacks on the other. Naturally this is, after all, only ordinary, reasonable, sound common sense. It is the policy of the Prime Minister. Hon. members must not say now that the hon. the Prime Minister said this, that or the other. The hon. the Prime Minister said that he could not prevent an African State from taking the bit in its teeth and wilfully co-operating with communism. After all, he cannot do that. In this case I have already furnished the reply to this House on 28th August, 1970. I then said that if neighbouring states were to lend themselves to forces which made aggression against South Africa possible from the communist or other sides, South Africa would do what any self-respecting country would do, in other words, she would defend herself, not only in a defensive sense, but she would hit back.

I said this again, under my Vote.

The Prime Minister has said this again. I am stating this in order to clarify the matter. In regard to this matter we must stop creating bogeys in the country. The onslaught of terrorism on Southern Africa is not only an onslaught on the White man; it is also an onslaught on the non-Whites. It is an onslaught on the freedom of the non-Whites. If the Chinese get their own way in South East Africa, they will enslave millions of Black people. They will then subject millions of Black people to a dictatorship which will be worse than anything those people have ever before experienced in their history. When we therefore, as a Defence Force, go on exercises such as those at Sibasa, or in other parts of the world, it is an instruction that Defence Force officers must preserve friendly relations with the local Bantu population on the best basis. The exercise at Sibasa proved that those good relations can be maintained. Today there are Defence Force units very near to Bantu areas where the best relations are being maintained, and where we are sometimes even asked, by the responsible authorities, to arrange Defence Force days so that they can see what is being done there to help stabilize their security as well.

†The hon. member for Albany referred to the danger of forces trying to control the mind of man. What he said is quite correct, and all I can say is that we are attending to this problem. In due course we will perhaps be able to take more efficient steps in this regard. The hon. member also referred to the taking part of regiments or units in ordinary shows. I am informed that this is the practice at present. In certain instances they can take part in shows at the State’s expense, and in other instances at the expense of the host. It all depends on what arrangement is made. If they do not want to go there at the State’s expense or at the local committee’s expense, they can go at their own expense. This practice is allowed but units must get the necessary leave to do so from the Army or Naval authorities, because in most cases people want the Army or the Navy there. As far as the Air Force is concerned, we have a different arrangement. We allow the Air Force to take part in special Air Force days when a few flying clubs come together and arrange a programme for a special day. The Air Force then usually takes part. If the hon. member wants all the details, I can furnish them to him by way of a letter.

*The hon. member for Odendaalsrus referred to the question of more training for women. I wish we had more room for training women, as at the present Civil Defence College. I did not want to say that we should train women on a large scale, but I do think it would be a good thing if we were able to train 400 or 500 per year. This produces wonderful results, but I think we should encourage our womenfolk to support to a far greater extent organizations such as the Suid-Afrikaanse Noodhulpliga, the St. John’s Ambulance Brigade and the Red Cross, and play an active part in these organizations. They can receive the necessary training there. At the moment we just do not have the funds to train more women than are at present being trained.

The hon. member for Worcester raised the question of the alleged attempt which is being made to persuade the International Red Cross to regard terrorists as prisoners of war. I hope that such a proposal never succeeds. I think it would be seriously prejudicial to the International Red Cross. As the hon. the Prime Minister has already, quite rightly, said, terrorism is a plague throughout the world. This is the method which is now being utilized to undermine order and stable government. This is organized murder, and nothing else. I cannot imagine a civilized organization ever lending itself to such a terrible undertaking. As far as South Africa is concerned, we shall most certainly adopt the strongest standpoint against such action. That is all I can say. I think that I have, with this, replied to most of the matters which have thus far been raised.

Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. the Minister has given the hon. member for Florida a conclusive reply, so there is no need for me to reply to the matter he raised. I have the Hansard report of what the hon. member for Durban Point said about this subject last year. I think I saw the hon. member for Florida with the hon. member for Durban Point a moment ago. Perhaps he should discuss the matter with him since he has now heard the hon. the Minister’s point of view.

As Voortrekkerhoogte is situated in the Pretoria West constituency, it is, of course, a great privilege for me to congratulate our present C.G., as we usually call the Commandant-General, and to welcome him to the Pretoria West constituency. The C.G. will have to pardon us for not having all the ships and water in Pretoria to which he is accustomed. I think he should use the Zambesi in the meantime and see to matters on the opposite side of the river. The post of Commandant-General has an interesting history. I just want to mention it here. It actually started in Natal. I think the hon. member for Durban Point will feel very pleased when he hears this, because it is in fact the first place in South Africa where we used the word “Commandant-General”. The man who occupied that post there, was Andries Pretorius. That post was created after the Battle of Blood River. He occupied it with great distinction. I believe he was a great opportunist, but it had nothing to do with his occupying the post. Andries Pretorius gave us a Blood River. Another interesting case is associated with the post of Commandant-General, which in fact came into its own in the old South African Republic. There was in fact only one person who occupied the post there, namely Gen. Piet Joubert. He was not really a militarist, because he regarded himself more as a president of the South African Republic, but in spite of that he gave us a Majuba of which we in South Africa are very proud. I shall come back to this point in a moment. Gen. Louis Botha was Commandant-General for a very short period. He gave us Colenso and Spioenkop. Subsequently, under the present classification, the post of Commandant-General was occupied by the predecessor of Admiral Biermann and now, of course, it is occupied by Admiral Biermann himself. We wish Admiral Biermann every success in this post. We hope you are going to be very happy and that you will occupy that post with as much distinction as your predecessor did.

While I am addressing a few words to our present C.G., I just want to add that we have sitting to his right a small, exceptional group of officers who have devoted their lives to the Defence Force with great distinction and great results. We hope he will make the best use of their abilities for our country.

Order! The hon. member must not address officials; he must address the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I am addressing them through you.

Mr. Chairman, what happened in this House yesterday was striking, and one asks oneself: What has come over this House? I am very grateful a spirit of peace and of truce is prevailing in a debate such as this, in this very debate on defence matters. One asks oneself: What is going on? Is it a question of being dumbfounded, is it bluff or is it a question of being exhausted?

We put South Africa first and not the party.

I am coming to that. I want to congratulate you. This morning’s Daily Mail says that the hon. the Opposition has caught this side of the House on the wrong foot. According to them, we had allegedly expected the clashing of swords and gunpowder smoke, but what had, we had?

I do not care what the Daily Mail says. I do not believe it in any event, but what I do believe, is that it is a good sign if a man with a temperament like the hon. member for Durban Point and a man such as the hon, member for North Rand argue so calmly here about national affairs and reveal such a fine spirit of patriotism. It is not the best thing on earth, of course, to congratulate an Opposition on its patriotism, but now I do so from my heart. I was absolutely pleasantly surprised by their conduct. To this I want to contrast the attitude adopted here by the hon. member for Houghton. I believe the future holds great things for the Opposition if it continues adopting this attitude which it is in the initial stages of adopting. If it grows and grows, there will really be a future for that Opposition once again. I want to thank them for that fine attitude.

While I am discussing this and congratulating them, I want to say—and what I am saying now, I mean very positively—that I am not completely convinced in my own mind that the hon. the Opposition as a whole shares the sentiments we heard from the speakers on that side of this House. I want to address a small request to them. They should try to influence the other hon. members on their side who do not have as much patriotism; they must cultivate that amongst those hon. members.

Speak for yourself and of your own patriotism; leave ours alone.

I am so pleasantly surprised that hon. members must pardon me for talking about it and if I come back to it a few times more later. In that regard I want to make another small recommendation. Since we are talking about defence, hon. members know that South Africa—and. when I speak of South Africa, I, as an Afrikaner, want to refer more specifically to the Republic we had in the North—has a glorious military past. If all the great nations of the world could have accomplished so much in the military sphere at that stage of their existence as South Africa did, they would have taken; their places in the annals of history. Take, for example, a battle such as that at Majuba. I know this involves the English, but I want to distinguish between English-speaking South Africans and those living in England. This should be taken into account when they judge these matters, and they should not condemn it. I draw a distinction between the two. Any country could be proud if it achieved as much as the South African Republic and the Orange Free State Republic did in such a short period of their existence. Incidentally, the Free Staters came to the assistence of the South African Republic in a very admirable way. They accomplished everything within a short period of time after the commencement of the Great Trek. It was one of the greatest armed battles I can call to mind. I think there are two nations which can be compared to that. These nations are perhaps Israel, the ancient state of the Jews in the olden days, and perhaps the present Israel, and Rome. The fact that the objective of the particular war could be achieved with one final blow, is something which will make the mouths of the military strategists and the political strategists water. I want to leave the matter at that. I want to tell the Opposition for the last time that this attitude of theirs was a very fine one and that they should please continue adopting it.

There are other matters, of course, in respect of which I agree with the hon. members, matters to which the Minister has already replied. For example, there is the matter of the pistol clubs, and I just want to say I hope more will be done for them. I do not know how many pistol clubs there are in Natal—the hon. member for Durban Point may tell us this—but I may ask him to encourage them to expand, because they may serve many a good purpose.

Where I do differ from the hon. member, is in respect of his plea for bivouacs to be held over long week-ends, including Sundays. I as an Afrikaner cannot approve of that, because we as Afrikaners believe that on the Sabbath one may do only that which is most essential and cannot be postponed. The fact that one of our greatest facets of arms, i.e. the Battle of Blood River, took place on a Sunday, testifies to that. However, this is done only in cases of emergency, and then only in exceptional cases. In that respect, therefore, I want to differ from the hon. member.

A few moments ago the hon. the Minister raised a matter in this House. He spoke about the building up of the will of a nation against, inter alia, terrorism, and it was in this regard that the hon. the Minister mentioned it. I am very pleased the hon. the Minister did mention it. In fact, I want to address a small request to him in this regard and submit it to him for consideration. Hon. members know that from time to time magazines make some mention of terrorism. I know that a considerable amount was written about it in the magazine Scope. In Pretoria’s daily newspaper, Hoofstad, lengthy articles were published, illustrated with photographs. A considerable amount was said about terrorism by a man such as A. Venter. However, it appears as. though our people are gradually becoming more and more lackadaisical. They completely forget that there is an extremely dangerous position on our northern borders and that it is becoming increasingly serious. Then there are occurrences, tragic accurrences such as land-mine explosions, which shock our people into wakefulness and which are given much attention by the radio and the newspapers, but subsequently this feeling gradually sinks away into oblivion once more. Now I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether we cannot do more in this regard. For example, is it not possible for us to make short news films which may be incorporated into cinema shows? In addition to this, I want to request that if this can be done, these films should be as realistic as possible and that we should obtain permission from the Department of the Interior, where necessary, to show such films. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to get involved in a Bantustan debate, but the hon. the Minister referred here to the security position in the light of the planned independent Bantustans. I do not know whether words mean anything, but we heard here from the Prime Minister that any Bantu state or any Bantustan may now come to negotiate with him. After they have received their independence, it will mean total and full independence. In a Press statement he went so far as to say that if they should want to play with China or Moscow, he could try to stop them with words, but could do nothing else about it. Now we hear from the hon. the Minister of Defence that in the negotiations for independence there will be no question of full independence, because provision will be made for treaties and restrictions to maintain our security. I am very glad to hear that.

May I ask you a question? Does the fact that we have a treaty with Britain make us less independent?

No, Sir, but then the Prime Minister should not say that these Bantu states could become red if they wanted to or could trade with whom they wanted to, including Moscow or Peking. Now the hon. the Minister says that it will be restricted by treaties. As I say, I do not want to get involved in that argument now, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister this question : Will the hon. the Minister please tell us what his attitude is towards the requests that have now come from two of the Bantustans for a Defence Force? I think that is a fair question. There have been two, requests from two different Bantustans in South Africa to take part in defence and to have their own Defence Forces. I am very interested to hear what his reaction is to that.

†Now I want to come back to another matter in the few moments I have left. It is obviously impossible in the time available to deal with this matter properly. I want to come back to the question of the Citizen Force. The hon. the Minister said that my plea was impossible and impractical, but that the interval now would be reduced to two years, instead of three years —that means six years total. Now we are on the right road. My proposal was four years. I still believe that with a little calculation and adjustment you can bring it down to four years. But now, having got this far, let us argue whether those extra two years are possible now, or whether they will be possible later. Having brought the time down to four years, I do not suggest that those men be then removed from strength. They would remain on the strength of the unit. They would retain their uniform for the full ten years. They are then available for call-up at any time. So your target force is still there. The fact that they have been better trained, that they have acquired a better unit spirit, makes them far more valuable than the man who has only done two camps and is still waiting for his last camp. These then are fully trained men on the strength of the unit for another six years, but would not be active, not be called up for periodic parades and not have commitments for those six years other than being available and on the strength of the unit. Perhaps they could have one annual bivouac or get-together to check equipment and see that they are still there. Those men, even though on the active strength of the unit but without active commitments, would, I believe, be better trained soldiers than those we are turning out spread over the ten years. Therefore, I hope the hon. the Minister will not just close this matter, but that we will go further.

I was glad to hear his remarks in regard to the non-continuous parades. Those parades are usually held on a Saturday afternoon or in the evening. They are an absolute waste of time. They comprise a roll call, a hair inspection and a lecture. It creates resentment; it interferes with sport, and it achieves nothing. If people have to be interfered with in the interests of a better Defence Force, then I would say: By all means do it. But when it serves no purpose, then I say that it should not be done simply for the sake of getting people together; do it only when there is a purpose, an objective and a need. I again say that I believe that bivouacs would be of far more value in the long term.

Sir, the hon. the Minister referred to commandos and rural regiments. I want to make a very heartfelt plea to him: Please do not destroy our rural regiments, our traditional regiments.

That is not the intention.

The hon. the Minister indicated that he felt that in the platteland you should have commandos and that you should have your regiments in the cities. Sir, some of the most glorious military history of South Africa has been written by rural regiments. In Natal we are proud of regiments like the UMR and the Carbineers, which have grown up as part of the history of South Africa. Then you have the Middellandse Regiment in the Cape and all the others. I am glad to hear the hon. the Minister say that that is not his intention.

There are various other matters which have been raised here to which the hon. the Minister has not yet had an opportunity to reply. I realize that he cannot reply to everything, but I hope that he will deal in due course with the other matters which have been raised. I do not expect him to reply now, but I should like to mention the points to which he has not yet replied. The hon. member for Salt River raised the question of the maintenance of vehicles and the question of vehicle parks.

I did reply.

No, the hon. the Minister dealt with the question of standardization. He did not deal with the system of maintenance to ensure that vehicles will be roadworthy at short notice. That is the aspect which the hon. member raised particularly. Then there is the question of pistol clubs, which I do not propose to debate further. I think the hon. the Minister misunderstood me. I did not mean that the Army should be committed to it; I meant a system of registration so that the pistol clubs will be entitled to purchase ammunition at wholesale rates instead of having to pay the high retail profit margin, even though the price has been reduced.

Then, Sir, I come to the last issue which the hon. the Minister raised and which I believe remains open, and that is the question of tying the Army to grades, with ranks and pay equivalent to those attaching to posts in the Public Service. I believe that that is something which should be looked at again, so that you do not have to promote a man simply so that he can get a better income, when his new rank does not fit in with the structure of the Army. Then there is the question of the mess-up with apprentices’ pay at Simonstown. This is the sort of thing that results when you try to put a military force under Public Service Commission control. Then there is the question of call-up of matriculants, the question of the Nuffield Week mess this year, and also the question of allocations, with the last of which the hon. the Minister dealt to some extent. I think those are the outstanding matters which the Minister did not deal with. Sir, I come back to this question of men versus machines. The hon. the Minister was able to quote what had been done in the past. I admit that a lot has been done. But, Sir, if you take a rugby field and a camp with 3 000 men, then only 60 or 90 players out of those 3 000 men can play on that rugby field in one afternoon. It is easy to quote figures and to say that you have done this, that and the other thing; it sounds good in globular figures. For example the hon. the Minister’s figures as to the number of resignations from the Citizen Force sound good. I do not want to bandy figures across the floor of the House; I do not want to ask him what percentage of his officers resigned; I do not want to ask him how many normal retirements must be added to the 97 resignations in the last year. I do not want to ask him to tell us across the floor of the House what the shortfall of officers is. He knows the facts, as I know them. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to break a lance for the commandos in South-West Africa, and point out the sacrifices made by the farmers there for the sake of the commando system. As you know, Sir, in South-West Africa we have to contend with long distances between towns. Consequently national servicemen must travel very far in order to attend commando practices. I have discussed the commando system in South-West Africa with the hon. the Minister on several occasions, and I want to thank him sincerely for the concessions which he made on various occasions which have had such good results. Actually, it has been an encouragement to many commando officers in South-West Africa to think that the Minister and the Defence Headquarters are interested in the commandos in South-West Africa to this extent. But there is nevertheless something which I consider to be a shortcoming, i.e. the spirit of indifference to the commando system. We in South-West Africa have become used to the international position in which South-West Africa finds itself, with the result that they are quite indifferent to the international problems and dangers which this holds for South-West Africa. They say that the international position as regards South-West Africa, is of such a nature that they can do nothing about it. They feel that nothing will happen in any case, and that South-West Africa is in good hands. It seems to me as if there is a spirit of indifference to the commando system as the result of this outlook. I have always felt that there is a certain measure of ignorance amongst members of the public in South-West Africa of the objectives of the commando system, and for that reason I want to plead here for the appointment of a public relations officer between the public and the commandos. I know that the hon. the Minister will tell me that the commandant of the commando in question is the public relations officer and that he will do the necessary public relations work. Sir, I want to tell you that the commandants of the commandos in the north with which I am acquainted, are often not well-off people, and it often happens that their time is taken up by public relations work, and that they cannot give the necessary attention to their farms or to bread-and-butter matters, with the result that they land themselves in financial difficulties and are obliged to reconsider their position in the commando. If, after years of training and personal expense and sacrifice, such a person were to resign from the commando, it goes without saying that the commando system would suffer. I am putting it like this because I have personal experience of the position in which some people land themselves if they are not very strong financially, and I therefore ask the hon. the Minister to consider such a step.

I should like to identify myself with the hon. members who have already congratulated Admiral Biermann on his promotion to Commandant General. I should also be neglecting my duty if I did not avail myself of this opportunity to pay tribute to Admiral Biermann for all he has meant to the Navy. Under his leadership the size of the Navy was increased. To my mind the present popularity of the Navy among our citizens is to a large extent due to the example set by him as chief of the Navy. Another fact which is of great importance is that very good relations exist between the Navy and the local authorities in the Southern Peninsula at the moment. As chief of the Navy, as a diplomate, and as a link between the Defence Force and the local authorities and the public, he has rendered the people of South Africa excellent services. I am very proud of the fact that the Commandant General is actually a registered voter in my constituency, and I hope that although he will shortly be moving to Pretoria, he will remain registered in my constituency.

†We are nearing the end of this debate and I would like to say a few words about some specialized units. Some of these have not been mentioned in this debate so far. First of all I want to refer to the Submarines and I want to congratulate all those responsible for the pre-planning and for the reception of the submarines in France, those people who went over to France and helped with the planning in order to accommodate the officers and men and their wives, and those responsible for the education facilities for the children of the men serving in a foreign country. I have only heard the greatest praise, from all of those who went to France, for the arrangements made on their behalf. The men themselves who went to receive those submarines, from all reports have been excellent ambassadors for the Republic, and I think it is therefore worthy of them and of the services they have rendered to the Republic that they should be rewarded with the excellent facilities that have been provided for them at the Simonstown naval base. South Africa can be very proud of the submarine crews that have been trained here and in France.

Then I want to refer to the Paratroop batallion, of which I have had some experience. There you have a dedicated group of officers and instructors. There is an excellent spirit and a fine pride in this batallion, and there is discipline and a safety record which I believe is second to none in the world. The Army gymnasium at Heidelberg is also an institution with which I am acquainted. This is an institution with first-class facilities and a strong conception of discipline, and those who have been through the Army gymnasium, will, I believe, echo what I say, namely that they received a first-class training there as future officers and N.C.O.s.

*Finally, still in connection with these specialized units, I just want to refer briefly to the Naval Band. The Naval Band is doing excellent work, particularly in the capacity of public relations officer for the Navy. It is very popular all over the Cape Province and I want to say this afternoon that everyone should be very grateful to Captain Imrie and the Naval Band.

†I also think it is appropriate that we should say that the Naval College at Gordon’s Bay, like the Army gymnasium at Heidelberg, is doing first-class work, and I should like to pay tribute to the work that was done by Captain Botha, who at the end of last year was transferred to Pretoria.

I want to agree with the hon. member for Durban Point that the danger of the present system regarding the Navy being coupled with the Public Service Commission lies in its becoming top-heavy. I do not want to go into the details. I think the point has already been made, but that is a very real danger. There is also another danger, and that is that too many of the lower ranks are leaving the naval service. I want to say to the Minister what I have said to him most years since I came to this House. One of the main reasons why we are losing people in the naval service is because there is not sufficient housing for them at Simonstown. Until the housing problem is properly tackled, the Navy will continue, as it is today, to be understrength. Not only is there a shortage of funds, but I believe there is also red tape between the Department of Defence and the Department of Community Development. Since Simonstown was declared a White group area, a number of houses and flats previously occupied by non-Whites have been taken over by the Department of Community Development. I believe the time has come for the Department of Defence to take over those houses and to see that they are developed and used by defence personnel. My plea to the hon. the Minister is to give consideration to the Defence Department taking over those houses from the Department of Community Development. Many of the houses acquired by the department are standing empty. Doors and windows have been broken and they are a wasted asset to the Defence Force. The other alternative, to assist with the housing shortage, is as a temporary measure for the Minister to agree to subsidize the rentals of those people who live outside Simonstown. They are paying very high rentals indeed and it is no wonder that many of them feel compelled to leave the naval service because they simply cannot come out on the salaries they are paid. I say that if we are going to build Simonstown up into a great naval base, as I believe we can, the Government must not be afraid to plan ahead for the development of Simonstown as a big naval base, and to spend the money to provide the facilities that will keep the people in the naval service. Not only does this affect the Navy, but it also affects the Dockyard. We have to face the situation that many of the people working in the dockyard live in Bellville, Parow, Vasco and other northern suburbs. They have to come by train, bus and car to Simonstown. It takes them hours to get there and back. If you want to have a full complement in the dockyard, and if you want to keep your navy up to strength in Simonstown, then something has to be done to provide housing facilities for these people near to the naval base. There are still other reasons why I think people leave the naval service. I do not want to go into details. The hon. the Minister knows what I have mentioned before. But there are inadequate fringe benefits and there is the absence of a contract system. He was kind enough to write me a letter after the debate last year, giving his reasons why he felt that there could not be a contract system. I have studied his letter carefully. I do not believe it is very convincing. I believe it is necessary to have a contract system and to have a re-enlistment bonus. In that way you will keep people in the Navy. Once again I appeal to the Minister to give his attention to the lack of recreational facilities, especially off-duty facilities, for the young trainees who come down to do service at the naval base at Simonstown.

Then there are a small number of petty irritations which, with little expense, could, I believe, be eliminated. I do not see that it is beyond the wit of the Minister and the department to arrange with the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs for free postage for those in the naval service. I believe that the old rail concessions could be reinstituted, and I believe that at least two or three times a year those people serving in the Navy should be given a free rail warrant back to their homes. In that way I think we would engender a better spirit among the people serving in the Navy.

Then there are two last matters I want to mention, two causes for complaints that have come to my notice. The first is that some of those young men who go to the university, prefer to do a year of military service first. Many of them seem to choose to go to the Air Force, perhaps because they have a scientific bent and are keen on scientific matters. But many of those young fellows are utterly frustrated because after their three months basic training they are kept on guard duties and other similar obligations. I believe that those who are in the position to do so and who are able and intelligent enough to go to a university, and are lucky enough to go to a university, should not be misused during that period of training—but their services be more effectively utilized.

Lastly there is another small matter which I would like to raise. It concerns the question of bilingualism. The policy of the department is bilingualism, English one month and Afrikaans the next month. It is a first-class policy but it is not always carried out in practice. I would like to mention that I have had complaints which I may say I have not investigated, namely that many of the notices emanating from the Castle are only in one language. If the hon. the Minister would look into that matter I would be much obliged.

Mr. Chairman, notwithstanding the fact that the Commandant General probably feels very welcome and at home in our midst by this time. I too want to congratulate and welcome him. When the Commandant General subsequently traverses the Republic on his travels, he will undoubtedly find that Heidelberg is the most beautiful constituency in our country. He will find that one of the finest institutions of the Defence Force, viz. the Army Gymnasium, is situated in Heidelberg. If he, in his capacity as Admiral, really wants to see a lot of water, he may also come to Heidelberg, because the Vaal Dam is situated in that constituency.

A great mind once said that if you want to make a very good speech, you can do it briefly and succinctly by using just one little word, consisting of six letters, and that is the word “thanks”. I want to devote a part of my speech to that this afternoon by saying “thank you very much” to the hon. the Minister of Defence. Six years ago a very fine and historic institution at Heidelberg was closed down. I am referring to the Heidelberg Teachers’ College. That college was rich in tradition and produced great men. Several of that college’s products are sitting on this side of the House today. I have no doubt that the institution that replaced the college, viz. the Army Gymnasium, will produce for South Africa men as great as and perhaps even greater than those produced by the teachers’ college. We are very proud of the commanding officer there, and I believe that he too will yet make an indelible impression on our military history. We have no doubt that some of the boys who are receiving and will receive their training there will also become great men in the defence of the Republic of South Africa.

I want to thank the hon. the Minister very much for having seen to it that that institution, the Army Gymnasium, is what it is. I want to say to him that the officers, the staff and all the boys there are very happy. How could it be otherwise? The buildings and grounds are situated among the historic sugar-bush-covered hills of A. G. Visser. The climate is excellent. There is an excellent relationship between the institution and the public of Heidelberg. I also want to thank the hon. the Minister, in particular on behalf of the town council of Heidelberg, for having been prepared to listen to us whenever we made representations, so that our representations always had very good results. We convey our sincere thanks to the Minister. In spite of what the hon. the Minister said this afternoon in connection with higher training for the Defence Force, we Heidelbergers want to say to him that he must constantly bear in mind having higher training of Defence Force officers taking place there eventually, in addition to what we already have at the Army Gymnasium. Heidelberg is close to the Rand University, should it be necessary for students to take a degree course there. The former Heidelberg Teachers’ College had its degree students make use of the lectures given by the University of South Africa, and this proved to be a success.

Then there is another small matter that I want to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. In doing so, I am not adopting a critical attitude or professing to have any superior knowledge, but I am doing it solely because I have unshakable confidence in the Defence Force and in its handling of matters. We find for example that boys, after matriculating, still cannot say what direction they want to follow in life. In other words, they have not yet been able to choose a career. I want to state very clearly here that our education departments are giving our boys vocational guidance in the high schools. They are doing this well and we are very grateful for it. However, it seems to me that boys in their high-school years are not yet responsible enough to absorb that vocational guidance fully, with the result that we find today that many matric boys, after matriculating, have not yet decided what profession to follow in life. After matriculating they go to the Defence Force for their military training, and because the Defence Force is inspired and permeated by patriotism and love of the fatherland, is disciplined and is intent on sending motivated citizens into the world, I want to ask the hon. the Minister this afternoon whether the Defence Force, despite its many duties, its many activities and its full programme, cannot perhaps devote some time, an hour or so a week, to giving vocational guidance to the boys who are entrusted to its care for that year. I have said that the high schools are doing this. The Department of Labour on its part is also doing its best to place our people in certain careers. Government departments and business institutions are also giving vocational guidance, but unfortunately that vocational guidance often degenerates into recruitment and is not really vocational guidance. I have the utmost confidence that, if our Defence Force handled this matter, it would do it in such a way that the boys would be able to make their choice with open minds, and that when these boys closed the gates of the Defence Force institutions behind them one day, they would not only leave those institutions as disciplined and motivated citizens of the country, but, with the guidance given to them in this respect by the Defence Force, would also know what to do. If this could be done, we would find that there would not be as large a labour turn-over in South Africa as we have today. I think I may say that one of the reasons why we have this large labour turn-over is that many of the boys, after having matriculated, still do not know what direction to follow and what profession to choose. They flit from one profession to the next, with the result that they are worth less to us as citizens than they would have been had they been able, immediately after matriculating or after receiving their training in the Defence Force, to follow a particular career in which they would have been happy, that they would have been better citizens to the Republic.

Mr. Chairman, in the very limited time at my disposal I crave the indulgence of the hon. member for Heidelberg. I have been instructed to cut my speech short because there is not much time left. We have listened with great interest and gratification to what the hon. Minister has told us today about the developments which have taken place in South Africa’s Defence Force. It is a report which fills one with pride and our congratulations go to those gentlemen who are leading our forces and are showing South Africa that unity which we should really have in South Africa. The Minister dealt shortly with the Coloured Corps which is at present in existence and told us of the possibility of extending the formation of a corps also to the Indian population group. I think that our Bantu population is being given a slap in the face.

After all, they are the indigenous people of South Africa and they have proved their loyalty to this country in more ways than one through the last three centuries. My personal experience of them after nearly 40 years in the Police Force is that I can vouch for their loyalty to the Government. This has already been shown by the fact that the Commissioner of the South African Police, no doubt with the Government’s approval, has now sent a mixed contingent to our borders. I am sure that when the reports come back they will prove that all of them—White, Indian, Coloured and Bantu—have served with distinction. We will be proud to call them fellow South Africans.

I therefore make a plea to the hon. the Minister to give the formation of a Bantu military corps serious consideration. We have heard today of the communist threat to this country. We acknowledge it. We know that it is something horrible, but we are not afraid of it. We will knock them out. Make no mistake about that. Who will be the peasantry that will knock these people out? None other than our Bantu in their Bantu homelands. It is therefore incumbent that we should inculcate them with the loyalty for which the Bantu looks to the White man at all times. The hon. the Minister has, quite rightly, spoken about how the chiefs welcome the Army manoeuvring in the Bantu areas. I know it, because when I went with detachments of the Police into the reserves, chiefs welcomed us with open arms. We have been able to rustle out some nest of wrongdoers, dagga-traders and all the rest. Therefore, I give him the thought that the formation of a Bantu military unit is due and that it should therefore be started now before he goes on to the Indians. Without detracting from the Indians, I guarantee that the loyalty to this country of the Bantu is paramount in this country.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Umlazi raised more or less the same matter as the hon. member for Durban Point. I think I have stated the policy of the Government clearly, namely that on account of the expense involved in the maintenance of defence forces, we cannot for one moment see how it is possible for the Bantu Authorities, whether they are self-governing or whether they are independent …

I spoke about a South African Bantu military corps.

I will come to that. We cannot for one moment see how they will be able to afford the upkeep of an army or part of an army. I think they must start off with Police units to keep order and stability within their country. As far as the employment of Bantu in certain categories of the Army itself is concerned, I want to say that it is the policy to employ them. We still have Bantu people in employment today. We are very proud of the services they are rendering.

As civilians?

Yes, as in the past. But I do not think we can start creating a Bantu corps in the Defence Force. I think that would be wrong.

*The hon. member for Durban Point put a question to me. He said already two Bantu Authorities had decided to request permission for establishing an army unit. As yet we have not received these requests, although I know about them. I think it is very clear that if a country such as Lesotho, which has been independent for quite some time, restricts itself to its Police mobile unit, this would be the advice one would want to give when such a matter came before one. I think it would be only wise to do so, because the upkeep of an infantry unit, or an armoured unit, or an artillery unit, is not child’s play. That is why one would want to advise that such a state start off with the establishment of a Police unit to do its elementary work for it and to assist in keeping watch over its security. I have stated the Government’s approach. What I said about our co-operation in Southern Africa, I said with the approval of the hon. the Prime Minister. I referred to column 2918 of Hansard of 28th August, 1970, when I stated this matter on behalf of the Government and said that we were in favour of a better understanding being created among the Southern African States in the economical sphere and in the diplomatic sphere, and of having everyone take up an anti-communist stand. I also said we adopted the point of view that through mutual co-operation these anti-communist Southern African States should forge closer links with one another in order to establish a bloc against Communism in Africa. We do not want to limit this to Southern Africa only, but we want to take it further, as the hon. the Prime Minister said, so as to seek co-operation with other African States as well, and to extend our co-operation to those who want to join us in establishing an anticommunist bloc. I do not know of any way in which I can state this more clearly. What the hon. the Prime Minister did say, was that if an independent state were to leave the fold and were to lean towards Communism, despite our endeavours to persuade it to take up an anti-communist stand, one would surely not be able to stop that State, but, in that case, if it were to place its country at the disposal of an aggressor who became a threat to us, South Africa would do what any self-respecting country would do. In that case it would protect itself and not sit by idly until it was caught napping.

†Then the hon. member referred again to the question of the Citizen Force and the training which we have given until now. Let me say at once that should the hon. member come forward with positive proposals with which we can deal, I will be prepared to refer it to the Supreme Command to ask for their advice. Then we can go into this matter. I am not bound to one system of training and I have proved it in the past. We started with a certain type of training for the commando’s and this year I came to this House with new proposals. If the hon. member can come forward with a proper proposal which we can consider I shall refer it to the Supreme Command. Then they can give me their advice. Then the hon. member referred to the question of tying the ranks with posts in the Civil Service. That, together with the representations made by the hon. member for Simonstown, will be considered. When I was listening to the two hon. members I thought that that was the annual speech I make when I meet the hon. Minister of Finance for a few hours to discuss the problems of the Defence Force. In other words, it was only a repetition of what I have already told him. Seeing that the two hon. members are supporting me, I shall convey their message to him when I meet him next year.

Do you have a lot of influence with the Minister of Finance, Piet?

I have had quite a lot of success; the proof of it has been before us today. We have had success on many a matter with the Treasury within the proper pounds of our capacity. I am not prepared to ask more for the Defence Force than the country can afford. I must be reasonable and as a member of the Government I must realize that there are other departments of equal importance which are also entitled to their share. I think that is only reasonable.

You are tempting me.

I agree with the hon. member for Simonstown in his paying a tribute to the submarine personnel. I have done so on two occasions already and also to the orchestra. As far as subsidies on rentals are concerned, I do not think that we can accept that. We have given our attention to the matter, but it has been rejected after due consideration. As far as bilingualism is concerned, I think I have made my policy very clear in the past as well as today. When incidents come to our notice, we shall try to rectify them. On the other hand, we can also quote quite a few instances where it was the opposite of what the hon. member said.

You do not know in what way I meant it.

I know where the hon. member …

I never said from what side it came.

It must be from one of the sides and so I say that the other side is also applicable.

You have a fifty-fifty chance that you are right.

No, I would say 100 per cent. I know the hon. member for Simonstown and I can guess what he is up to.

Then you need not say it.

I want to refer to the hon. member for Etosha. That hon. member’s commandos certainly have a problem. There are large and vast areas. If the hon. member would just look at what we had done, he would see there was a comprehensive allowance paid out by us to commandants for A Commandos, B Commandos and C Commandos. It varies from R420 to R360 per year, and is paid out irrespective of their daily rate and their dependants’ allowance. Then we have certain allowances for adjutants and quartermasters, which were increased recently. In this way we are trying to accommodate the men. However. I want to agree with the hon. member that commanders in his area pay a very high price for the service they render. We must express our thanks to them. We shall effect an improvement if we can do so with the assistance of the Minister of Finance, and he provides a great deal of assistance.

Votes put and agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 19.—“Tourism”, R2 372 000, and Loan Vote O.—“Tourism”, R100 000:

Mr. Chairman, I should like to request the privilege of the half hour. Before commencing my speech on tourism, I want to deal very briefly with the Estimates. There is no need for me to spend much time discussing the Estimates. The amount in the Estimates is a very small one. There are very few changes. The only real change is an additional R80 000 in respect of grants-in-aid for the Tourist Corporation. I just want to say that this does not even cover the devaluation of the rand, because the bulk of the money of the Tourist Corporation is used for overseas publicity. So there is no need for me to spend much time dealing with this matter.

Then we also have the expenditure in connection with the Southern African Regional Tourism Council, which has now been reduced by R80 000. The Minister will quite probably tell us at a later stage why this has been done. The amount appropriated for the Hotel Board has been reduced from R600 000 to R100 000. The Minister will probably furnish us with his reply in this connection as well.

Recently the importance of the Tourism Vote has on various occasions in this country been brought pertinently to the attention of the Government and the public as a result of statements made by various organizations, and through the Press, for we are all satisfied that this is an important method of obtaining foreign currency and capital. There is some measure of concern because nothing is being done to strengthen the portfolio as such and make even greater efforts to attract tourists to this country. In addition, the prestige of the Department of Tourism has suffered for the worse because the Minister saw fit to down-grade the post of Secretary of Tourism to that of Deputy Secretary. We should like to hear from the Minister at this juncture whether he thought that this post was of such minor importance to him that he down-graded it, and deprived the Secretary of his post as head of the department in order to appoint a Deputy Secretary in his place. In the third place— I do not want to spend too much time on this matter—Satour, as far as we know, changed its advertising agency in the middle of a campaign, a project which was to have lasted for three years. In view of that we have to accept that, at this stage, a vacuum exists in regard to campaigns and projects advertising agents have to suggest to Satour, and that activities have probably been delayed in this connection. The Minister may also try to furnish us with a reply to that aspect.

All these aspects I have mentioned do nothing but detract from the prestige of the Department of Tourism and render it suspect in the eyes of the public. In this regard I want to say that we are at our wit’s end with this hon. Minister.

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

Evening Sitting

As the Minister is not present, I move—

Order! I have to rule that in terms of Standing Order No. 89 (1) (g) I am unable to accept the motion. Only an hon. Minister may move such a motion.

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, how could the Minister move that motion? He was not here!

Well, an hon. member may not move that motion.

On a point of order, what happens when there is no Minister in the House? As there was no Minister in the House, somebody else must be entitled to move that motion.

Order! The rules have to be complied with ! [Interjections.]

Order!

Mr. Chairman, may I address you on this matter?

No. I have given my decision.

Mr. Chairman, when the debate was adjourned before supper, I was dealing with the Estimates. I had indicated that the Estimates were not only not more, but that they were actually, less in terms of devaluation. I also indicated that the Department of Tourism had been downgraded as a result of the actions of the Minister, and that there were other matters in regard to of which we have grave doubts. I said that we are reaching the stage where we are at our wits’ ends in regard to the actions of the hon. the Minister. Last year we were very critical of the Minister in regard to this post and the importance he attached to the post. He took it amiss of me for criticizing him year after year in regard to his actions as far as the Tourism Vote is concerned. When the House was adjourned this afternoon I said that we are reaching the stage where we are at our wits’ end on account of the actions of the hon. the Minister and that we on this side of the House have considered moving that his salary be reduced. After giving due consideration to the matter, however, we decided, not to do so. We think the hon. the Minister is the victim of circumstances. When I say that the hon. the Minister is the victim of circumstances, I refer to the mistake he made about ten years ago when he agreed to become a member of that Party to be used as window-dressing for that Party. He was appointed to the Cabinet immediately after joining the Party and ever since the importance of his Posts is of such a nature that he has not been able to persuade the Cabinet to appropriate a larger amount on the Budget for an important Vote such as this.

You mean instant promotion.

I want to raise a further objection before commencing my speech. This concerns the report of the Department of Tourism we received yesterday. This report was Tabled yesterday and we are already dealing with this Vote this evening. In the first place, I take strong exception on behalf of this Party to the actions of this hon. Minister and his department as far as the reports are concerned. [Interjections.] In the second place. I want to say that it really makes no difference at what late stage this report has been Tabled, because there is nothing in it lust imagine a department which is as important as the Department of Tourism submitting a report such as this! The reports on the various matters comprise a total of only six pages. Yes, they comprise all of six pages! Do you know, Sir, what is being dealt with in this report apart from the usual routine points? I quote paragraph 8.4 as an example. It reads as follows—

This decision was taken in Zambia. No, not in Zambia, but in Malawi. I now quote from paragraph 8.13—

There we have the whole version of what is happening in regard to tourism. [Interjections.] Then we have a report by the Economic Advisory Council of the Prime Minister in which twelve specific recommendations are made. We tried last year to discuss these recommendations in this House. Everybody knows what happened on that occasion. We were asked not to discuss the recommendations since there was some confusion as to whether the report was confidential or not. We reconciled ourselves to that and did not discuss the report any further. The only item out of the 12 specific recommendations accepted by the hon. the Minister, is the recommendation that an advisory committee be established. The hon. the Minister then accepted that part of the report and established the advisory committee. This advisory committee is still considering what should be done about the report.

I know precisely what the hon. the Minister is going to do. He is going to hide behind the fact that an investigation was conducted in this regard and that an advisory committee was subsequently appointed. Furthermore, he is going to submit that, on account of this, he could not do any thing and that this is why tourism has been relegated to the background to such an extent. In view of this long delay an appeal is being made from all over the country, an appeal that we should have a dynamic approach in regard to tourism and, in view of our unfavourable balance of trade, for the immediate expansion of the Department of Tourism.

†Mr. Chairman, does the hon. the Minister consider that he is furthering the aims of his department by demoting it to the extent that there is no longer a secretary for the department but only a deputy secretary? In all fairness I put the question to the hon. the Minister. Does he think that he is promoting the interests of such an important department by indicating to the rest of the world that the department is demoted and that it is no longer important as far as the economy of South Africa is concerned? I put it to the hon. the Minister: Is he playing the game? In the past we have consistently attacked the Minister from this side in an effort to spur him on. We have made numerous recommendations now embodied in the proposals of the commission. We have come to the conclusion that it is Government policy to relegate this important department to an unimportant role. Sir, I have reason for saying this. Surely to goodness the hon. the Minister, as a very senior Minister, has some influence with the Cabinet when he puts his approach as far as the Department of Tourism is concerned. He must have some influence, even if it is little. If he cannot succeed in building up this department to play the important role that it should play in the economy of South Africa, then the Cabinet must have decided that this department is to be relegated to an inferior position. Sir, there should be a powerful co-ordinating body or a committee consisting of representatives from the Department of Tourism, the Department of Railways and Airways, more particularly, and the Department of Information, because these departments are all very pertinently involved in creating a better atmosphere as far as tourism is concerned, an atmosphere in which more tourists will come to this country. Mr. Chairman, I am not in a position to talk about the Department of Information at this stage; we will come to that when the Vote of that department is dealt with, but the Department of Information has an enormously important part to play in propagating and promoting tourism internationally. I put it pertinently to the hon. the Minister: Has it never occurred to him that there should be a co-ordinating committee between these various departments to put forward suggestions as to how best to promote tourism? It staggers me to think that such an important department should be so horribly neglected. I will mention at a later stage what is happening in other countries and how tourism there is regarded as an earner of foreign currency. I think, Sir, that the South African Airways has an important part to play in promoting tourism and I think the Department of Information has a very important part to play. I think that there should be a co-ordinating committee to co-ordinate the activities of the various departments. We have not got the necessary co-ordination. In this respect, Sir, will you permit me to read out certain comments made by Mr. Human, the president of the Handelsinstituut?

*I quote (translation)—

It is in view of this that I said that co-ordination of this nature, which we should like to see between the various departments, simply does not exist.

†Sir, in view of the adverse trade balance the whole country is looking for avenues to improve the situation, and in this connection tourism comes very much to the fore. At the moment we have an adverse balance as far as out- and in-tourists are concerned. We are still R30 million in the red, according to the report of the Tourist Corporation and one or two other reports that we have. It is calculated that by 1980 we should be able to break square. The present adverse balance can be converted to a credit balance with powerful promotion of tourism, particularly abroad. We know that there has been a substantial increase in tourism during 1970-’71, but this is not good enough, More than half the tourists coming to South Africa are still coming from neighbouring territories. Here I should like to quote briefly from Satour’s report. Of the 389 000 tourists we had in South Africa in the year 1970-’71, 225 000 emanated from Africa and the balance from Furopean countries and Asia. This resulted in a deficit of something like R25 million. Sir, we do not want to make comparisons all along the line, but I would like to cite a few figures. We find that as far as Spain is concerned, tourism contributes 36 per cent of the value of their total exports. In fact, tourism in Spain produces more foreign exchange than our gold output. In Austria the figure was 23 per cent of their exports; in Ireland it was 15 per cent; in Finland, in 1968-’69, 30 per cent of their total exports was contributed by tourism; in Greece the figure was 24 per cent. I know that the increase in South Africa has been something of the order of 14 per cent in 1971, but that is not good enough. The debit balance, in the case of South Africa, as far as in- and out-tourists are concerned, is still R28 million. Italy had a credit balance of 1 100 million dollars in 1969 and 1 200 million dollars in 1970. Sir, I mention these figures to the hon. the Minister not because I want to be unduly critical but to show what other countries are doing and what importance they attach to the Department of Tourism in those countries. I lay the charge against the hon. the Minister that either in terms of a Cabinet decision or his own decision, tourism in this country is not considered to be as valuable as it is in other countries.

*We find that in France the hotel industry was granted a loan of 63 million dollars at 5 per cent by the State in 1969, and that Israel invested 77 million dollars in the hotel industry while making provision for an amount of R18 million in its Budget for 1971—R18 million as against approximately R2,2 million in South Africa.

Sir, this brings me to the Hotel Board and the question of hotel accommodation. Other members on this side of the House will discuss the hotel industry and the problems experienced by hotels at this stage because they have now, on account of the fact that they have been encouraged by the Hotel Board to provide additional accommodation, landed themselves in the situation that they have a surplus of beds throughout the country, particularly here in the Cape Peninsula. Because we have not had the influx of tourists the hotels had reason to believe they would have, they are finding themselves in a critical position today. For example, we find that there are many hotels for sale here in Cape Town and what is even more serious, is the fact that there are hotels which are feeling the pinch to such an extent that they had to reduce their tariffs in order to fill their rooms. We find that five star hotels are now competing for tourist trade, particularly block tourist bookings, with two-star hotels and even one-star hotels. To my mind this is a most unhealthy state of affairs. Sir, we find that so many bodies are agitating and raising a cry about tourism at this stage that I am surprised that the Minister has not taken more energetic steps in this connection. For example, we find this kind of report—

They called for the creation of a single centralized authority in South Africa to deal with all matters affecting the hotel industry. At present the chaotic situation was created by the fact that the hotel industry had to depend on five different authorities, three Government departments and two statutory bodies for direction in its affairs. But now we find that the proverbial chicken has been hatched first; we have provided the hotels, but we have not got the tourists.

Hotels are fighting for survival. South Africa’s fight against inflation has become a fight for survival for many hoteliers. Among the hardest hit by price increases and other inflationary trends is the Western Cape hotel industry which now shows signs of reeling under the burden of the country’s economic problems.

So we can quote one passage after another, from the hotel organization and the Hotel Board and newspapers, describing the predicament in which the hotel industry finds itself at present, and this is solely due to the fact that the hon. the Minister and the Cabinet have not devoted the necessary attention to this important matter of tourism.

†I should now like to turn to additional attractions for the tourist industry. I am suggesting that we are neglecting as far as our international promotion is concerned the wonderful fishing that we have in this country. When dealing with that I claim that a large number of tourists are going to the Seychelles, Mauritius and to the Portuguese coast and all over the place whereas along the Natal coast and the Zululand coast I have been informed that we have some of the most wonderful fishing grounds in the world. We all know what an attraction fishing trips and particularly “block” trips, have as far as tourism is concerned. Not in a single instance as far as I can recollect have I seen a splash as far as the South African fishing industry is concerned, either of the East Coast or of the West Coast, where we have wonderful fishing grounds. We have Zululand and the Wild Coast and we have South-West Africa, all claiming to have some of the best fishing grounds in the world but we are not promoting them.

Sir, we have a sport in this country, known as surfing, and we have a wonderful coastline with soft, sandy beaches, where some of the most wonderful surfing in the whole world can be had. I see no reason at all why we should not compete with Hawaii or Sydney in that respect. I think that is a wonderful way of promoting tourism to this country. But are we making the most of it? I have already spoken about photographic safaris and I have expressed the view, which I base on facts, that there are national tourists organizations who with national daily newspapers and international airlines are promoting photographic safaris all over the Globe. I have instanced the case where one of the Canadian daily newspapers, The Globe and Mail, in conjunction with the Canadian Tourist Corporation and BOAC, organizes not annual trips, but many trips annually, as photographic safari block tours, where the three partners involved all share the costs. Sir, I ask you whether there is a country in the world which has a better scope for photographic safaris than South Africa has? Is there a country with the diversity we have? When will we think of these things? When will the South African Airways, in conjunction with one of the daily newspapers and the Tourist Corporation, run the same sort of thing and make it possible for block tours to come to this country? And let me say that block tourists will always get cheaper accommodation and cheaper air fares. They can all come to this country on photographic safaris.

Dealing with publicity and promotion, we appreciate the work done by Satour, but it can only operate within the scope of its budget. Brochures, press advertising, films, all have their uses, but to have the maximum impact in this sophisticated world, more TV time should be bought. When I say this, I refer to the report of Satour here, which I do not have the time to read now. The TV time they bought last year gave them a total audience, over 12 months of the year, of 38 million. Sir, I know just how expensive it is to buy TV time overseas, particularly in America and some of the other highly sophisticated countries. But I will say this, that one half-hour of TV time bought over the TV commercial channels in the U.S.A., will give you an audience of more than 38 million in one showing. I say that much more virile and positive methods of promotion should be used internationally to build up our tourist trade. Sir, I am going to make a suggestion to the Minister. [Interjections.] All the good suggestions have come from this side of the House, and I am going to make another recommendation to the Minister, and that is that he should create a statutory board, and not the sort of board recommended by his commission or by the Riekert Commission, and not the sort of board that will probably be recommended by his advisory committee. He should create a statutory Board and on this statutory board should serve members of his department, representatives of the hotel industry, representatives of the publicity bodies, representatives of the travel agents, representatives of the transporters and the carriers, and other interested bodies, and the body should have substantial funds to begin with. I claim that if such a statutory body is created they will do what all other statutory bodies are doing and what all other boards under the marketing Act are doing.

May I put a question?

No. The hon. member knows that I only have a few minutes. I say to the Minister that all statutory bodies are inclined to levy their own members with a subscription to collect the funds to promote whatever project they have in mind. I would suggest for the Minister’s very serious consideration that he now create a statutory body, and when I say a statutory body, I mean a statutory body with all the power to act as far as tourism is concerned, with sufficient departmental financial support to make its job worth-while, and leave it to do the job of tourism and to do it powerfully, vigorously and dynamically, instead of doing it in the sort of haphazard way in which the Minister is doing it at present.

When the hon. member, who has just resumed his seat, began speaking last year in the debate on the same Vote, he said the following—

This refers to how the Minister views the Vote—

He said it again this evening. Initially he forgot about it, but after the dinner break he said it again. [Interjections.] But then he had second thoughts. He said he thought his hon. colleagues would make a proposal about the hon. the Minister’s salary being reduced, but then he felt sorry for him. He now plays around, hovering between reprimanding a man and feeling sorry for him; reprimand him and feel sorry for him. Under that hon. member’s influence, if I do not steel myself, it seems to me I shall also begin to feel a kind of pity, but that is altogether in a different context and I think it goes much further. I want to say honestly that I do not feel sorry for the hon. the Minister. To look at him he is radiantly healthy and he does his work, his work progresses and he prospers. My feeling of pity lies with that hon. member in particular, and with South Africa as a whole. This evening I have been thinking that if the hon. member were to be the shadow-Minister of Tourism and some day accept that portfolio, what would be left of him in the first place, and in the second place, what would then be left of tourism in South Africa? I think it would be a good thing if the hon. the Leader opposite gave thought to first making the hon. member a Deputy Minister before he becomes a full-fledged Minister.

Louder please, I cannot hear.

Order! The hon. member for Umlazi must contain himself.

If the hon. member had just arranged his paragraphs a little differently, he could have fitted them in exactly with what he said last year. He began by complaining about too little money for this Vote. He says the hon. the Minister has fallen prey to circumstances, but surely he is also sitting there because he has fallen prey to circumstances. It all began when the hon. member was still a general. He has completely forgotten about the fact, that he was still a general at the time in quite another capacity. The only contribution he and that party ever made to this department is that when the United Party Government began to show signs of convulsions in its closing years they were able to establish the South African; Tourist Corporation in 1947. That is all they did.

Then the hon. member attacked the hon. the Minister and said he is only here as a “window-dressing”. I do not know whether it is worth the trouble to say something about that. There are a few other matters I want to raise, because I preferably want to try to get away from that negativity.

The hon. member again touched on the hotel industry and the question of accommodation. Before I take this any further, I should just like to refer to the report we obtained from this department. The hon. member may take an example from this report. He also referred to it. I no longer remember what adjective he used in describing these six pages, but it was somewhat shocking. Let me tell the hon. member that there is more in these six pages than the hon. member has said during his half an hour this year and the half hours in the two preceding years. This report is a condensed summary of facts. I should like to express my appreciation for this summary in which everything, which is really necessary, is dealt with. It seems to me the hon. member cannot see this. I do not know why it is treated so shabbily. The hon. member counts the pages, but he must remember that it is expected of him to read the contents. Only small children in Sub-A count the pages.

Let us look at what the newspapers, which support the hon. member, have to say. They made inquiries in connection with the hotel position. They state, inter alia, that it is difficult for the hotel proprietors in the Western Cape to make ends meet. There is one thing they wrote which I find very interesting. They wrote—

Every year that hon. member complains about hotel development. I do not know why he did not quote what his own newspaper, or one of his party’s newspapers, states here, i.e. that after having instituted further investigations it appears that hotel development has completely outpaced tourism.

My party has no newspapers. It has no slaves.

You are the biggest slaves of the lot.

In addition I have a report here of the Hotel Board. Had the hon. member taken the trouble he could have referred to the second page of this report. There is a full account of how far we have progressed, but the hon. member does not notice this. He comes along here with quotations to indicate what the position is, even in France, for example. What have we to do with France’s tourism? I do not think the hon. member actually understands very well what this is all about.

There are other data of importance as far as I am concerned. If we look at the report we can see, for example, how the number of tourists have increased in recent years. If we only look at how many there were during the various years, and we look at where we stand today, we see that the latest available figure is 389 000.

I quoted that.

The hon. member did not do so. We obtain this same information in the report of the Tourist Corporation. What I find of great importance is that in 1950, i.e. two years after this Government took over and when this department had not even been established yet, 13 390 tourists came to South Africa from Europe. By 1970 this number of tourists had increased to 116 813. I want the hon. member to tell me what he and his party are actually complaining about. Is there stagnation at the present moment? Let the hon. member tell us. Is there stagnation here and are we going downhill as far as tourism is concerned? The hon. member keeps complaining and every time he requests half an hour for that purpose. For three successive years the hon. member has been asking for half an hour, but he has not yet said anything about tourism. What the hon. member apparently loses sight of, and his party too I think, is that the development of tourism is something quite new. It is, in reality, in the initial stages. This department is only 10 years old, and at this early stage we are fortunate, under the guidance of the hon. the Minister of Tourism, to have been able to evidence this progress, which we are very proud to be able to point to this evening. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I listened very attentively to what the hon. member for De Aar had to say but I have great difficulty in finding any continuous thread in his argument. The only conclusion I can come to is that if he is the Deputy Minister for Tourism on that side of the House I think that we would prefer to keep our existing Minister. I would like to support my hon. colleague from East London City in regard to the low priority which the Government is affording the tourist industry in its promotion programme. I am worried because a valuable industry is being neglected. All the main elements that are required to promote such an important industry as this appear to me to be absent. There is a complete absence of any sense of urgency. There is an absence of leadership and an absence of co-ordination and, most important of all, the funds that have been allocated for the promotion of tourism appear to me to enjoy a priority that is way down on the list. As far as, first of all, the lack of urgency is concerned, we in Parliament and those in the industry as a whole are still awaiting a policy statement in regard to the Government’s intentions with tourism. The Riekert report to the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council, which contained recommendations in regard to the tourist industry, recommendations on a broad front —in fact a report which can well be called a blueprint in embryo—was tabled more than a year ago. The contents of this report have, however, not yet been published. We do not know which recommendations contained in the report have been accepted by the Government nor what the Government intends doing about any of those recommendations. And this despite the fact that the first recommendation in the report was that the Government should make a policy declaration in regard to tourism as soon as possible and that that declaration should be given as wide a publicity as possible.

The report of the Department of Tourism for the year ended March, 1971, was tabled only yesterday, more than a year after the period to which it refers. It gives no indication of what the Government’s policy in regard to tourism is; it is full of completely trivial happenings and neglects the broad picture of the tourist scene. So far we have had no report of the progress made by SARTOC although we were asked and agreed to contribute R273 000 last year and are now being asked to contribute a further R193 000 this year. These are very big sums of money and we do not even know what SARTOC’s functions in detail are. On the information that is available to us we simply do not know what is happening. We do not know what is planned by the Government; we do not know what the Government’s intentions are on the broad front of tourism. From the little that we do know, we are entitled to assume that little is happening. If anything is happening, we can only assume that it is happening very slowly and without any sense of urgency.

The industry continues to suffer from a lack of co-ordination, a remedy for which was contained in the Riekert Report. In the public sector we have various bodies, we have the Department of Tourism itself, Satour which is a statutory body, the Hotel Board another statutory body, we have the Department of Justice dealing with liquor licensing, we have the Departments of Transport and Information, we have the provinces and the Parks Boards. In the private sector we have the total industry, liquor and non-liquor, the travel agents, hoteliers, tour operators, we have publicity associations, we have chambers of commerce and industry and the Handels Instituut, all of which are interested in tourism, but all of whose efforts are completely unco-ordinated. The Rickert Report did recommend that the board of Satour should be broadened by adding to it representatives from the public sector and from the private sector and that it should become an advisory body to the Government with some teeth, that it should be a statutory body. It also recommended that national tourism congresses should be held regularly. We on this side of the House prefer that Satour should be left alone as an independent body, but we do support the idea of a broadly based advisory body which would be representative of both the public bodies and private bodies that are interested in tourism. Instead of this the hon. the Minister has appointed a small advisory body, a non-statutory body admittedly—and I am glad to say this—containing some very able men. But it is a body that is responsible to him and not to Parliament. We have heard nothing of a national tourism conference such as was recommended. I suggest that the hon. the Minister is going completely the wrong way about the co-ordination of this important industry. As far as financing the industry is concerned, it enjoys, as I have said, a very low priority in Government allocations. The grant to Satour which to all intents and purposes has been static for the last four years at under R2 million, is hopelessly inadequate for Satour to do a proper job. I had the pleasure during the last recess of spending some time in Sa tour’s Lon don office. I was very impressed by what I saw there. I was impressed with the dedication, the initiative and the hard work displayed by the staff of Satour’s London office, but they are acting on a shoe-string budget. If it were not for the fact that the South African Airways has a substantial advertising budget in the U.K. and if it were not that there is close and friendly co-operation between Satour and the South African Airways, I would suggest Satour could not possibly do an adequate job. To me it is obvious that there is a huge potential market in the U.K., in Germany, in America, in Australia and in other countries for Satour to exploit. To do that requires money and I hope that in next year’s budget the Department of Tourism is not going to be one of the areas where such financial stringency is going to be exercised. Tourism can be of immense value to South Africa. It can lead to improved international understanding of our problems and to a greater utilization of our hotel capacity, a capacity which at present is under-utilized and which is likely to become more under-utilized as present developments come on stream. In other words, tourism is an industry which can be expanded considerably without further capital investments in it. [Time expired.

Mr. Chairman, it is a great privilege and an honour for me to be a member of this House, and I want to give you the assurance this evening that I shall always endeavour to make a positive contribution and shall do my utmost to be a worthy member of this House. I also want to avail myself of thus opportunity to express my thanks for the friendly reception I have had as well as for all the advice and guidance I have received. I also want to thank the voters of Oudtshoom this evening for the trust they have placed in me by sending me to this House as their representative. Neither can I omit this evening to mention the name of my immediate predecessor, Mr. P. M. K. le Roux. He was a member of this House for many years and represented the constituency of Oudtshoorn for many years. This constituency wants to thank him very much for what he did for it both as a member and as a member of the Cabinet. It is interesting to note that the constituency of Oudtshoorn was represented by a Le Roux in this House since 1923. In other words, this surname is inseparably linked with the constituency of Oudtshoorn. There is also another name that is closely connected with the history of Oudtshoorn. This name is closely connected not only with the history of Oudtshoorn, but also with the history of the whole of South Africa. I am referring to the late Senator C. J. Langenhoven, a son of the Little Karroo and the author of our national anthem. I believe that the Little Karroo played a very important role in the life of this unforgettable figure. Therefore we are very grateful that we are able to show tourists and visitors to Oudtshoom his house “Arbeidsgenot” in the town. Indeed, it is visited by a large number of people every year. In 1961 there were 5 663 visitors to this house and in 1971 there were 9 576. We anticipate that this number will be doubled next year during the Langenhoven centenary year. It was also through Langenhoven that Meiringspoort, near De Rust, became well-known. Even though a tarred road winds through this very beautiful kloof today, it still has a very strong attraction and a wonderful charm for the motorist and the tourist. The constituency and its voters are proud of the stately and rugged old Swartberge, surrounded by fertile valleys. It is these fertile valleys that make the Little Karroo such a special place, one that may perhaps be described as a place flowing with milk and honey, and that supplies every tourist with the most flavoursome and delicious fruit.

But then the people of the Little Karroo also play a very important part in attracting more tourists to this area. They are people who know the hardships of life, because Nature has not always been kind to them; but they are also people who have learnt to find solutions to their problems and whom we may describe as people who still display the qualities of genuine friendliness and sincere hospitality. These are also the people who have made a very great success of their farming operations, so that the rough Little Karroo could be converted into a delightful place.

Then there is another very great and important attraction in Oudtshoom, one that received a great deal of attention in he pas few weeks in particular, i.e. the ostrich. We have near Oudtshoorn two very well-known ostrich farms, which attract a great many visitors and tourists every year. The figures I have show that there were 20 000 visitors to these farms in 1960, and no fewer that 80 000 in 1970. I should like to mention here this evening that after the shattering collapse of the feather market in 1914, a fine recovery was made in 1945 and 1946, and that there are now 10 feather auctions every year that may also be viewed by tourists. Since February, 1965, ostriches have been slaughtered in a highly modern ostrich abattoir, the only one of its kind in the world. In 1970 a start was made with the tanning of ostrich skins.

But now I come to the greatest attraction of Oudtshoorn, i.e. the world-famous Cango Caves. It is interesting to note that the municipality of Oudtshoorn took over the control of these caves in 1921, and that this is a local authority to which one can really take off one’s hat, because it has done its utmost to make these caves a very great attraction for visitors to South Africa. I should like to mention here this evening the name of the town clerk of Oudtshoorn, Mr. Michael Schultz, who has played a very great and important part in this. Thus an amount of no less than R¾ million was spent on the development of these caves in the past ten years. In 1961 the number of visitors almost reached 68 000. Last year it was 176 000. There is an increase of 10 per cent per annum. We anticipate that this figure will still rise considerably, because in the course of this year tenders will be invited for the building of a cableway to the summit of the Swartberge, and also for the construction of ski-runs! I may mention that there will be two: one below, where the technique of skiing may be learnt, and one on the summit of the Swartberge. Consequently we anticipate that the number of visitors to the caves will be approximately 250 000 in 1975. I should also like to mention that the very well-known programme “Son et Lumière,” which was recorded in the caves, is already available to tourists in seven languages.

Then we also have in Oudtshoorn the C. P. Nel Museum, which attracts many tourists every year. I also wish to mention the hot springs near Calitzdorp, which are now being developed by the Divisional council at a cost of R¼ million. In the immediate vicinity there is the Kwagga Park, and Ladismith is proud of its Seweweekspoort.

In short, Mr. Chairman, I am grateful that I may represent a constituency in this House that has a very beautiful environment, an environment with an exceptional climate that it can offer and sell to tourists, that it has hospitable people and that, as far as the future of the tourist industry in South Africa is concerned, Oudtshoorn will always play a very important part. Therefore I am glad to serve such a constituency and shall do everything in my power to see the people of that constituency happy and to make them happy. I believe—and this is my philosophy of life—that man must be happy in his immediate surroundings and in his home and that he must create happiness there for himself, so that we may have that happiness in the greater whole, in the greater South Africa. I wish to conclude by saying that the Almighty blessed Oudtshoorn and its surrounding area with many beautiful things. May these things in the years to come be and remain a permanent blessing for its inhabitants and for the visitors to that area.

Mr. Chairman, it is my agreeable privilege to congratulate the recently elected member for Oudtshoorn on behalf of this side of the House, and I think on behalf of all the members of the House, on his maiden speech. I venture to say that it is one of the best maiden speeches I have yet listened to in this House. I think that if the hon. member for Oudshoorn continues to state his constituency’s case, and that of the party he represents, as he did here this evening and during the election in Oudtshoorn, there are still many good years ahead for Oudtshoorn and for the hon. member. The hon. member brought a new atmosphere to this debate with the contribution he made. I shall tell hon. members why. Apart from the merit of the hon. member himself, he indicated this evening what can be done by people with initiative. He mentioned the name of Mr. Schultz, the town clerk of Oudtshoorn, who is known to many of us. He is a person who campaigns particularly vigorously for tourism. What the hon. member has sketched of the plans and achievements in Oudtshoorn, can be ascribed to the initiative of those few who inspire others. This is not happening in a densely populated urban spot, but in a part of our country which an hon. Senator on that side of the House called the “deep” platteland. It is there where people ostensibly live in so-called isolation. With respect to this I want to say that it is specifically the platteland and areas such as Oudshoorn with their attractions, together with the necessary initiative of the locals, which entices tourists. Tourists are not drawn by hotels that all look like those one finds in large foreign cities. Hotels are necessary and there must be accommodation. Tourists are not lured by amusement parks such as one can find anywhere abroad, but rather by typically individual tourist attractions such as one finds in Oudtshoorn.

We have been listening to this debate since 8 o’clock. The hon. member for East London City requested half an hour …

In order to say nothing.

… to state the standpoint of that side of the House. But what in fact have we heard from him? The hon. member for De Aar quite rightly said that it was largely a repetition of what he has said the past three years. One sometimes gains the impression that some hon. members on that side of the House have the idea—and here this has also been stated as such on occasion—that the tourist industry in South Africa must eventually take the place of the goldmining industry in South Africa. This is a completely unrealistic approach, but what is even worse is the fact that hon. members, including the hon. member for East Lond City, come to light with a string of objections and complaints about the functioning of this department. In a lamentation the hon. member for Constantia, who was the next to speak, referred to this department’s “low priority”. The hon. member for East London City said that the Minister has virtually allowed his department to be de-graded so that a deputy secretary is now in charge of it. Here they are advocating greater expenditure. This is the same party whose people, day after day in recent weeks, have reproached the Government here and outside for having too many government departments.

But, man, it is an investment.

The hon. member is now saying it is an investment. What is involved here is a government department, not an investment.

One invests in tourism for the future.

The hon. member has more talents than I have; he can see far into the future. May I tell the hon. member that if it is an investment—I do not want to deny this—then the money invested in every other Government department is surely also an investment.

But you get an income from tourism.

The objections of hon. members on that side, about there being too many Government departments, are ringing in our ears. They present to us the fact that in the United States of America there are only 12 departments. However, what is happening here? Because we are dealing here with a small Government department which has only a limited role to fulfil—it fulfils that role very well—and operates on its limited scale, we have had to listen to the complaints that have come from that side this evening.

What we also have in other spheres has again come to light here this evening with the hon. member for East London City trying to compare non-comparable aspects. The hon. member would like our tourist influx from abroad to be comparable at this stage with that from Spain, Greece, Austria, etc. This is surely an impossible comparison the hon. member has tried to make here, because Spain and Greece are poor countries chiefly dependent on tourist traffic for their revenue. With them it is an industry. They are countries with large populations. What draws tourists to those countries? In the first place it is the fact that those countries have a character all their own.

Do we not have one?

Yes, I want to tell the hon. member that we also have one. However, I am afraid that some days he wants to relinquish it.

I say those countries draw tourists because, in the first place, they have individual, characteristic features. In the second place I mention the fact that these countries are situated near the rich countries of Western Europe which are looking for holiday and tourist opportunities. For that reason there is inevitably a large tourist traffic from the rich European countries to those countries adjacently situated. Have those hon. members ever thought that a tourist’s stay in those countries is a very brief one. It is only a matter of a few days. On the other hand, the tourist who take the trouble and incurs the cost of coming here inevitably pays a much longer visit to South Africa. If one therefore wants to compare numbers, one must multiply the number of tourists that come to South Africa a few times to be able to make comparisons.

However, what is of importance, as far as I am concerned, is that one should look at the statistics which indicate the extent to which tourist traffic to South Africa has increased. When I look at the statistics I cannot understand the hon. member for East London City’s lamentations. He intimated last year that we only had a growth rate of 9 per cent. It must have been clear to him that, as far as tourist traffic is concerned, we had a growth rate of 18 per cent. Here the numbers speak for themselves. If those numbers are projected on this scale, they indicate that by the year 1980 we will have 750 000 tourists. If one compares this with the fact that we have a White population of almost 4 million, I say that this is an excellent traffic figure, because I want to state very clearly this evening—I do not know how the hon. member for East London City, who asked me whether we do not also have individual characteristics in our country, feels about it—that if a tourist scheme were to be launched in this country, with our population composition—which amounts to the fact that we would be swamped by tourists who outnumber our population by two or three to one—we would not retain that character which we do have. [Interjections.] The hon. member who can see into the future says I am becoming afraid. Was it not the hon. member who spoke of the “White backlash”? I am not becoming afraid. I am not becoming afraid at all, but I am saying that my country means something to me and it means something to the tourist because it is what it is. If an excessive number of tourists were to change it in the course of a few years, my country would no longer be what it is. It will no longer have the same significance for me and neither would it have the same significance for those tourists.

You are as afraid of tourists as you are of immigrants.

The hon. member says we are afraid. I have indicated to him that at the growth rate being maintained, thanks to the activities of this Department and he related statutory bodies, projections indicate that by the year 1980 we shall have to receive three-quarters of a million tourists in this country. Do hon. members on that side think this is not a sufficient number? Do they think that three-quarters of a million tourists in relation to a population of just more than 4 million Whites, are too few tourists? [Time expired.]

The fear-stricken hon. member for Stellenbosch is a very strange chairman for the tourism group of the Nationalist Party. The hon. member is the chairman of the group which is to encourage tourism, and what is his plea in this debate on tourism? His plea is : “Please do not let too many people come here; our character will change,” but then he says that Greece is getting tourists on account of her national character. He has confidence in the ability of Greece to maintain and protect her character, but he has no confidence in the Afrikaner’s ability to retain his character and his national identity.

†Sir, I do not want to waste time on that hon. member, who does not understand the difference between an investment and expenditure and who has repudiated one of his own colleagues. He says that we have not got the attractions of Greece, but he has just been told what attractions we do have; we have caves that people can crawl into; we have big birds that people can come and look at. But he says we have no attractions for tourists. We have plenty. Sir, before I continue I would like to add my congratulations to the hon. member for Oudtshoorn …

Who has come and gone.

His stay here has been a very short one this evening. But I wish him a pleasant sojourn in this House. He said that he had come here under the ostrich emblem. He has done something else; he has created a drought in some circles. I hope the drought will be cured and that in time he will go back to Oudtshoorn and lead the ostriches until they lift their heads out of the sand and join us here in this House in the 1970s, in the twentieth century.

Sir, my task this evening is to deal with hotels, but before dealing with hotels I want to refer to the hon. member for De Aar, who said: “Alles is in the verslag”. Because I am interested in hotels, I read the report of the Department of Tourism, which we received yesterday afternoon. I managed to read it this afternoon during another debate. The hon. member says that everything about hotels is to be found in the report. I read Chapter V which deals with the grading of hotels and complaints received from tourists. Paragraph 5.1 deals with the grading of hotels. There they tell you how many hotels have been graded— 1 218. I thought I would see what the Hotel Board thought about it. I found that they had only graded 1 213, so the hon. the Minister of Tourism and his department managed to grade a whole five more hotels than his own Hotel Board had been able to grade. But that is just in passing, Mr. Chairman. Paragraph 5.2 is headed “Complaints received from tourists” and deals with complaints received during the year. Paragraph 5.3 says—

Paragraph 5.4 says—

It then breaks them down into the different grades. Paragraph 5.5 says—

It then deals with all the things that people complained about. We have had a column so far, Mr. Chairman. Paragraph 5.6 says—

Which should please the hon. the Minister of Defence—

Paragraph 5.7 says—

Then we go on the Chapter VI, with another heading. I have therefore learned from the report of the Department of Tourism that 1218 hotels were graded—, a figure which does not agree with that of the Hotel Board—, and I have also learned about complaints which have been received, and not another single word. But that hon. Minister and his Deputy say, “Alles is in die verslag.” How right he is, Sir! Everything is in the report. I then decided, Mr. Chairman, to have a look at the Estimates. After all, that is what we are discussing here. We are discussing the Estimates in which provision is made for money to run the Department of Tourism. I had a look at the Estimates and I found that the first item dealing with administration, lists one Minister, one Secretary, who has now become a Deputy Secretary, and the rest of the staff. Sir, this Government obviously has great faith in the hon. the Minister of Tourism. They have given him control over 71 staff members, 71 people earning R245 000. They obviously have confidence in the hon. the Minister. Then they make provision for R21 000 for motor transport. Provision is made for just under R2 million for grants-in-aid to various bodies, and for R71 000 for advertising. I then searched this Vote, which runs into four pages, and I found that after those three items, the next highest cost to the taxpayer of South Africa in the whole Department of Tourism is the salary of the Minister at R19 000. He is the fourth most expensive item, for which the taxpayer of South Africa pays, in the whole Department of Tourism. Mr. Chairman, he is a senior Minister. Near him sits the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration, so I had a look to see how many people he was entrusted with. I see that he is entitled to control 8 452 people. Then I thought to myself: Let us see what the hon. the Minister of Defence handles. I found that the hon. the Minister of Defence handles 31 995 people. I thought in my heart that the hon. the Minister of Defence, when he quietly looks at the Vote of the hon. the Minister of Tourism and thinks of this 31 995, will say to himself : “Kyk wat hulle vir die Engelsman gee—71.”

Then I thought I would like to have a look at the report of the Hotel Board itself, and what do we find? We find that under this Minister, with the 71 people that he is entitled to control, whole chains of hotels are being priced out of the market and have had to cut their tariffs because of empty rooms. A whole company of hotels cut their tariffs in order to fill their rooms and still had to sell out, and this pattern has been repeated over and over—empty rooms, debit balances, the collapse of companies, sell-outs and reduction in price. [Time expired].

If tourists come here from overseas it is, of course, also necessary to supply them with entertainment, and if there is perhaps a tourist in this House this evening, I think he has already had good value for his money. But we know the hon. member for Durban Point as a happy-go-lucky person who can crack jokes, but this evening I think he took a little bit too much advantage of that. This is the first time since I have been in this House—and I have been here quite a few years—that I have heard an hon. member, in congratulating an hon. new member, actually doing so with quite a bit of sarcasm and mockery. But that is what happened here this evening when the hon. member congratulated the new member for Oudtshoorn. I cannot but imagine why this is so, because I know that the hon. member —and he said so himself—lost quite a lot with the Oudtshoorn election. It cost him quite a bit.

I listened here to the hon. members for East London City and Constantia. The hon. member for East London City’s speech put me in mind of a rooster pecking at a grain of corn. He pecked here and he pecked there and then the accusation that the department and the Minister are neglecting tourism stuck in his throat. To use his own words, if I have written them down correctly, he said: “This important department has been horribly neglected.” Although the words differed, this was also the drift of the hon. member for Constantia’s speech. Harsh statistics and hard facts surely disprove this claim of these two hon. members. In the short time at my disposal I should like to prove this.

In all respects we accept that the tourist industry is regarded as an important part of the world’s economy. It is indisputably an industry that makes a considerable contribution to South Africa’s economy and can do so even more extensively. Although there are those who would like to see the tourist industry developing much more rapidly—and the hon. members also revealed this in their speeches—so that the Republic can thereby earn more foreign exchange, I am convinced that too rapid a growth would be wrong. Here I associate myself with what the hon. member for Stellenbosch said in this connection. I say it would be wrong to artificially stimulate tourism en masse to the Republic. In the past 10 to 15 years in the tourist industry there has been an orderly and constant growth, and in respect of numbers one finds that the pattern of the last 20 years is such that the tourist industry has doubled every 10 years. In 1960, for example, the number of visitors totalled about 169 000; in 1970 there were virtually 390 000. Over the past half decade we find a particularly constant increase of tourists from both overseas and from countries in Africa, and in the past two years this rate has accelerated markedly. In 1968 there was an 8,8 per cent increase. In 1969 there was a 9,5 per cent increase, as against the previous year. In 1970 the grand total of tourists from beyond our borders increased to 389 694, i.e. 18,7 per cent above the 1969 figure. This is regarded as a record figure. But this tourist influx was not merely a matter of luck or chance. The 1971 figure indicates that 459 478 tourists visited this country, an increase of 17,9 per cent on the phenomenal growth of the previous year. In the past two years the increase of tourism in South Africa was twice as great, i.e. double the increase in world tourism. Since 1970 the long-distance tourists, i.e. tourists from areas other than the countries of Africa, have constituted 45 per cent of our tourist traffic. It is estimated that 48 per cent of the 1971 number came from overseas. Authorities who have a better knowledge of these matters than I myself do, are convinced that tourism from the countries of Africa, i.e. from our neighbouring areas, has more or less reached a saturation point. The increase was about 5 per cent or 6 per cent last year. At this stage England is still our foremost source of tourism from abroad; hence the increase in 1971 of 17,5 per cent in comparison with 1970. The most rapid growth and increase in tourist traffic was from Western Germany and the U.S.A., i.e. 65 per cent and 45 per cent respectively, in 1971. If this growth rate continues along the present lines, the tourist traffic from beyond our borders ought to exceed the half-million mark in 1972, i.e. this year, and in 1980 it ought to reach three-quarters of a million.

Notwithstanding the criticism from some quarters, South Africa and the bodies dealing with this matter can look with satisfaction at the growth of the tourist industry. There is now a great possibility that devaluation can be an additional stimulant for the sound increase in the number of tourists. It is thought that devaluation will help the industry because accommodation and travel in South Africa will be cheaper. This will, in fact, be a greater encouragement to the visitor from abroad to visit South Africa and stay here for a longer period. His French franc and German mark will be able to buy him more in South Africa. According to authorities the present exchange rates make the Republic one of the cheapest countries in the world for the tourist. The middle and even lower income groups in many countries have now become a tremendous tourist potential for us; even more so than the visitors of status were in the past. After devaluation the Republic could possibly turn out to be a tourist mecca, and this also applies with respect to the average man who calculates that here he can get the best value for his money.

In conclusion I just want to refer to a small paragraph on page 4 of the department’s report. I want to express my thanks to the Railways, because here it is stated that—

In Railway debates years ago I lodged that plea with the Railways, and I am therefore very glad that there has been positive reaction to this. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member began by talking about a cock and then proceeded to give us a typical illustration of a cock.

I think the hon. member did not listen carefully.

He pecked at this and pecked at that, and in the end did not really achieve anything. After having had the opportunity now to listen to three speeches from the Government side, it does not surprise us, either, that the hon. the Minister finds himself in such a predicament, because if this is the sort of advice which he gets from that side and on which he must act, he will naturally not be able to accomplish much. Therefore we on this side of the House would rather be positive and constructive and bring matters to the hon. the Minister’s notice, matters which we believe are of material importance. We hope he will take our advice, as he has done in the past.

We all have a particular interest in tourism, because it is a matter which holds far-reaching implications for South Africa. What I want to concentrate on is trying to determine whether South Africa is getting is rightful share of what is generally regarded as an explosion in the field of tourism. There are countries in the world which draw literally millions of tourists a year and which earn literally millions of rand in that way. If we compare with that the 400 000 tourists who came to South Africa last year, we are, of course, low down on the list. I accept that we are isolated. We are fairly isolated because we are not on the main air routes of the world. I am not trying to draw a direct comparison, either, but tourism has become a worldwide business enterprise today.

You are the man who slandered South Africa in connection with its tourism.

Mr. Chairman, this hon. member has never been more than 50 miles away from Vanderbijlpark; so I do not know what he knows about this. What I want to insist on is that tourism has become a world-wide business enterprise and we would like to see to it that South Africa gets its fair share of it. The demand and the explosion in tourism do exist. The reasons for that, of course, are obvious. In the first place there are more and more people who have more and more money and leisure to visit other parts of the world. In the second place the local tourist attractions have already reached saturation in most countries. In the third place tourism has to a large extent become a matter of prestige. People like to come back and say : “I have been overseas.” In the fourth place there has been such tremendous development in the field of transport that even remote parts of the world can now be brought within the reach of the tourist.

So there is this explosion in tourism, but in our own specific case it is essential for us to draw tourists to this country, in the first place for social or cultural reasons. We are isolated from the rest of the world and we should like to have that contact with them …

But that is not so.

… that cross-fertilization which is so necessary. The hon. member may speak when I have finished. I should like our people to have the opportunity to peep over the hedge; we also want other people from the outside world to have the opportunity to establish as untrue the caricature of South Africa which is so often held up to the outside world. What the hon. member for Stellenbosch and others do not understand, of course, is that tourism is also an economic necessity for South Africa. We do happen to have foreign exchange problems, and we do happen to have problems with our reserves. At this moment already there is a negative balance as far as tourism is concerned. Two years ago they spoke of R10 million; last year they spoke of R15 million, and now my colleague has spoken here of R28 million. We should like to hear from the hon. the Minister what that negative balance in respect of tourism is and how large that gap is. More important than anything else is not only the foreign exchange which can be earned, but also the fact that for political reasons and for reasons of international relations it is essential that we should draw tourists from abroad. Every time I have had the opportunity to go overseas it has been so striking that people who have visited South Africa as tourists usually have a better knowledge of our country, a better understanding of South Africa and in almost all cases also a greater measure of goodwill towards South Africa. At the moment we are spending R7 million a year on the Department of Information, of which R4 million is set aside for publicity. Here we can advertise and get publicity for South Africa free of charge if we would only make use of these opportunities.

I come now to the statistics to which the hon. member for Koedoespoort referred. He just accepts things which I feel he should not accept without some thought. In this report it is said that we had 400 000 visitors from abroad last year and we are told that this represents a 19 per cent improvement on the previous year. When we look at this report, however, we see that we suddenly had 10 000 tourists from Botswana, which we never had in any previous year. From Lesotho we had 3 000 visitors, while not a single Basotho ever came to South Africa in any previous year. All of a sudden there are 14 000 from Swaziland, but never before have we had anyone from Swaziland. What happened here, of course, was that the system of book-keeping was changed. This figure of 19 per cent seems to be an artificial one. Previously these visitors whom I have mentioned were probably classified as domestic visitors, but now they have suddenly become visitors from abroad. This figure of 60 000 more visitors in South Africa last year we should, in fact, correct by deducting 28 000 from it. Then we are left with only 33 000, which is only a 10 per cent improvement on what we had before and not, as they are trying to make out to us, and 18 per cent or 19 per cent increase. This is what one would call a form of statistical inflation. We do not only have it in our economy, but in our Department of Tourism as well.

What worries us about the number of people from abroad who visit South Africa, however, and I take cognizance of the fact that 10 000 more people from Britain visited South Africa, is that the number of visitors from the Americas remains comparatively small. It is true that approximately 5 000 more people came from America itself, but America still only accounts for about 10 per cent of the number of tourists who come to South Africa.

†I believe this is an important issue. We want to draw tourists from America, because they are inverterate travellers; they are spenders, and normally come here to stay for quite some time and to spend quite a lot of money. I am anxious to discuss with the hon. the Minister ways and means of increasing the number of tourists that we could draw from America. It is the national ethos in America to think in terms of big things. They like doing things which, in their own terminology, are “great”. They like things that go around the world. They have around the world flights, and the North Pole flights, and so on. At the moment South Africa is isolated as far as America is concerned. The thought I would like to put to the hon. the Minister is that he should use his department and his prestige in the Government towards the development of around-the-world tours in the Southern Hemisphere. This would have an immediate appeal and have a considerable attractiveness as far as the Americans are concerned. Already the framework is there. There are many flights down to South America; from South America to South Africa we have direct fights, some of them operated by the South African Airways. South Africa could be the centre from where we could organize further tours in Southern Africa. We also have direct air links with Australasia. The same sort of thing could happen there. From Australia tourists could return to America either via the South Sea Islands or via Hawaii. Here. I believe, is an immense field from which we could draw tourists. If Americans could see this as part of a big package tour, around the world tours in the Southern Hemisphere, it would be something that would have immense impact and appeal to the Americans. From our point of view, this kind of tourist development is necessary. It will take some time to plan it, to promote it, but this hon. Minister is known for the dynamic action that he normally takes. I think that this is a suitable opportunity for him to establish himself fully in the Government as the man who could organize this type of activity. [Time expired.]

He could go and play with his yo-yo in Brazil.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to take the opportunity to offer heartiest congratulations to Mr. Wessels, who is at present the head of this department, on the responsibility that has been entrusted to him. We want to give him the assurance that he will obtain the utmost support from this side of the House to let this department also come into its own in all respects. Similarly we should also like to express our thanks and appreciation to all members of this department. In mentioning these officials, I should also like to make an exception by including the hon. the Minister’s private secretary, Mr. Cas Bothawho is also doing very good and specially appreciated work in this connection.

Mr. Chairman, this evening we have listened here to a group of speakers on the opposite side of the House who spoke with contempt of this department. The hon. member for Hillbrow, who has just resumed his seat, said at the beginning of his speech that he wanted to be positive this evening. But let us see in what respect that side of the House was, in fact, being positive. This report, which was published by the department, was spoken of with contempt. The hon. member for Durban Point referred to it humorously. He made fun, inter alia, of the merely 71 officials of this department. But if he and the hon. member for East London City had read through this report, they would have found that in the past year these 71 officials have dealt with no less than 203 000 people. They had dealings with these people in the interests of tourism and in the interests of South Africa. But there is a further reason—and this is a fact the United Party cannot explain away—why this department and this hon. Minister are spoken about with so much contempt. The reason is that this hon. Minister was previously a member of that party. But that is not all; he is also referred to contemptuously because he is an English-speaking person on this side of the House. It is not necessary for me to prove this, because that side of the House has already proved it this evening. When he compared this hon. Minister with the Minister of Defence, the hon. member for Durban Point said mockingly, inter alia, that the Minister of Defence could have stated: “Look what they are giving the Englishman”. But that is not all. When the hon. member for De Aar attacked the hon. member for East London City, the hon. member for East London City said by way of an interjection : “I am not the only Afrikaner on this side, but he is the only Englishman on that side”.

Is that not the truth?

You said it by way of an interjection. We all heard that ridiculous remark. If that side of the House wishes to imply that they want to serve South Africa with love and goodwill, as they implied in the debate on the Defence Vote, this can also be done in respect of this department. The hon. member for Hillbrow referred, inter alia, to the hon. member for Stellenbosch and said that we are afraid of tourists from abroad. We are not afraid of those people.

But I want to mention another factor. The hon. member for Durban Point also mockingly said that this Government must have a tremendous amount of confidence in the hon. the Minister. That is true. We have sufficient confidence in this hon. Minister because he is strong enough to tell tourists who want to come along here en masse that what they sometimes want here does not always suit South Africa. [Interjection.] That hon. member is now laughing, but I want to ask him if he is in favour of casinos being established in South Africa. Is he in favour of strip-tease dancing being freely presented in South Africa generally? That is what the masses want. That is what a large sector of the masses overseas want, and this hon. Minister was strong enough to say no, and we praise and thank him for that.

I should like to come to another thought. One of the most colourful figures we had in the Department of Agricultural Technical Services was a certain Mr. Jack Brewis. When addressing farmers he made a habit of beginning with the words : “Farmers, do you know your land?” I fear that if the question “Friend, do you know your country?” were asked of the tourist enthusiasts in South Africa, very few would be able to give a positive answer. I think that one of the reasons for that is the fact that our local authorities do not let the tourist attractions in their respective regions come into their own. I want to refer to a few instances overseas. Volendam in the Netherlands is a tourist attraction merely because of the fact that they retain the traditional dress and customs. The city of Haifa has become famous as a result of the remains of an old nearby fort, which has a very interesting history. Fortunately we in South Africa also have one particularly good example, and the hon. member for Oudtshoorn referred to it this evening in his maiden speech, i.e. Oudtshoorn. I think it is time our local authorities adopted a new approach for utilizing and giving substance to our tourism. I know the department cannot be blamed for that, but I should like to suggest to the Minister that he should consider establishing a board or committee consisting of his public relations officers, who will trace these undeveloped tourist attractions and incorporate them in a specialized tour policy, tour programme or tour route. Those who are interested in geology, for example, can be supplied with a tour guide in which all the geological wonders of our country are indicated. For those interested in history, all the important historical places can be indicated. We should like to ask the hon. the Minister to consider that. In furnishing these examples of towns or local authorities which do not make full use of their sources, I want to mention two simple instances. Both these examples are, it so happens, in my constituency, but I should like to refer to them. In Senekal there is a square which is completely surrounded by fossilized tree stumns. One of those tree stumps is about 100 feet long. The main route from Cape Town to Durban passes that tourist attraction at a distance of about 400 metres. I think very few of the people know this. In Bethelehem, about 50 metres from the main route, there is the bird sanctuary where, inter alia, we encounter the royal swans we received from King George V in 1947-’48. These swans were later supplemented with swans from the royal gardens. Very few people know about that, and we should like to ask that this committee, consisting of the liaison committees, should do this introduction work if it is possible.

I think that Golden Gate is reasonably well known generally in South Africa. In the past there was the complaint that Golden Gate was more often than not closed as a result of the few facilities available. I think that we can now rightfully claim that the Golden Gate has now swung open for South Africa. I am referring to the recent opening by the Prime Minister of the new Brandwag Tavern, a project which cost about R1,2 million. I want to auote to hon. members what the Prime Minister said about Golden Gate on that occasion, and I quote from a report (translation) :

This evening we should like to pay tribute to the National Parks Board for the work they are doing, on such civilized lines, not only to preserve South Africa’s natural scenery, but also to make it available in the way they are doing. To those who do not know South Africa, we should like to say that they never will know South Africa if they have not seen Golden Gate in all its glory, as it looks at present.

I think this beauty also places a responsibility on us as tourists in South Africa, i.e. that we can only enjoy and appreciate this when we take upon ourselves the responsibility of keeping these tourist attractions clean and tidy. One appreciates the fact that there are some groups and newspapers who launch campaigns to promote tidiness: but this ought not to be necessary. We in South Africa must ensure that this exquisite country of ours is also kept clean by us when we are enjoying its attractions. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, several members on the other side of the House have expressed their annovance this evening at the report which the department has made available to us. I do, however, want to remind members on that side of the House that this report is written for intelligent people. As such this report is a deeply penetrating comprehensive report. For people who have the desire to examine the activities of this department, I believe this report is a very informative one.

The hon. member for Hillbrow spoke of inflationistic statistics which were made available to us, as if to say that the visitors from Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland were previously listed under “foreign visitors”, while at present this is not the case. I do want to point out to the hon. member that the number of international tourist arrivals decreased by 3 per cent in the past year, while here it increased by 18,7 per cent. Therefore, the tourist industry of the Republic reflects a very good increase, as far as we are concerned.

But there is something else the hon. member for Hillbrow mentioned, i.e. that the Republic has become a caricature. I do now want to state that in this respect I must agree with the hon. member. We have, it is true, become a caricature with such an Opposition of so many years standing. An Opposition of so many years standing does indeed make a caricature of the Republic, with an Oudtshoorn thrown in for good measure. This country, the Republic, has a great deal to offer us and to offer the tourist, because it is an international resort which is held in high repute by the tourist abroad. It is a country with a rich variety of recreational facilities and, as far as the natural scenery is concerned, it is a country with the greatest number of hours of sunshine in the world, even exceeding the 2 700 hours of sunshine on the French and Italian Rivieras. In Pretoria we have 3 400 hours of sunshine per year. It is those particular facets of the Republic of South Africa which have contributed to the tourist industry increasing by 18,7 per cent, while internationally it has increased by only 7 per cent. For this fact the hon. the Minister of Tourism, together with the Secretary and the members of the departments, receive the utmost appreciation from this side of the House. But likewise the Director of the Board of Control of the South African Tourist Corporation and the members of that department have also, in our estimation, reflected a fine team effort. We have here a team effort by several departments in the Republic.

I mention here the team effort, incorporating the Department of Tourism and the Departments of Information, Agriculture, Water Affairs, Transport, etc. Each of these departments is making an outstanding contribution to the establishment of tourist attractions in the Republic of South Africa. Sir, I have said that as a tourist country the Republic is unique. It is unique, not only as far as its natural beauty is concerned, but also for the thousands of kilometres of beaches we have along our coasts, but in addition for the nine national parks, the beautiful mountain ranges, the blue of our skies and our colourful wealth of flowers, with 11 000 varieties of wild flowers having been recorded in the Cape alone. To a large extent the Republic’s potential as a tourist country is as yet undeveloped, and therefore I believe that the Department of Tourism, with the team it has, has a special task to perform. I am thinking, for example, of the coast that stretches from Port Elizabeth on the East Coast up to Port Alfred, which is virtually completely undeveloped and is awaiting that development that we need very badly in the Republic. I am not thinking only of the beach resorts, but also of the need we have for facilities for our holiday-makers in the interior, people who, for a short while, want to get away from the noise of the city and its polluted air, and who have a longing and a hankering for the silence the rural areas have to offer the holidaymaker in that respect.

Sir, here I want to lodge a plea with the hon. the Minister and the department for the development of that potential in the interior. I am thinking, for example, of the Nuwejaarsdam at Alicedale near Port Elizabeth, which is still completely undeveloped as a result of a lack of supply facilities, etc. I am also thinking of the Mentz Lake with its exceptional plant growth and that exceptional climate, which many of our inhabitants have a very great need for. I am also thinking of the Boesmans River, where there is the potential of a beautiful dam that can still be developed, and I am also thinking here of the various departments involved in that.

Sir, if I have a plea to make here, it is one for co-ordination in particular. I am thinking of the co-ordination of various bodies involved in the development of our territory, including holiday resorts and places of historic significance. I am also thinking of those 21 associations in the Republic which, each in a particular area, are devoting themselves to nature conservation. With all these associations and the various departments in mind, there is surely a need for co-ordination as far as the development of the tourist potential of the Republic is concerned. I therefore want to advocate that this co-ordination be extended, not only as far as the development of this potential is concerned, but also with respect to the planning which must frequently be done by local authorities. As far as local authorities are concerned, one finds a lack of planning with respect to local potential, and here the department can surely furnish a great service, particularly in the rural areas, where such a great need exists. I therefore feel that this department, with its fine achievements and all the fine things it has established, also has a very big task as far as co-ordination is concerned.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Bethlehem has a very well-known name, the name of Louis Botha, a historical figure of ours. If he is a relation of that well-known man, he has unfortunately not inherited one of his great characteristics, i.e. a sense of humour! The hon. member for Somerset East said that the Republic of South Africa was unique. I quite agree with him. It is indeed unique. But he should know better than most of the hon. members of this House that the mountain chains, the beaches and the blue of our heavens were not created by the National Party.

Who said so? [Interjections.]

I want to deal specifically with the sacking of Mr. V. P. Steyn, Mr. Vladimir Petrus Steyn, the former Secretary for Tourism, the former Secretary for Defence, a man who carried the great responsibility of acquiring arms for the Republic during a very difficult period in the middle 1960’s.

Do you want to gossip again?

For some reason, known only to the hon. the Minister of Defence, that post was abolished and Mr. Vladimir Petrus Steyn was appointed as Secretary for Tourism in 1966. That post was specially created for him. He took over what was a comparatively new department with a very small staff. Let me deal with some of the things about Mr. Steyn that

we know. We know that Mr. Steyn was a dedicated public servant, that he was a strong personality, a man with drive and initiative, a man of originality and ideas. In fact, he was a dynamic character.

He was not a United Party man.

We know also that five years later this dynamic personality, after 36 years as a public servant, was kicked out of the Public Service. He was the man who built up the department to what it is today, a department with seven branches and, as one of the previous speakers said, a personnel of 71. He was also the chairman of Satour. Despite that, he was kicked out of his job on 31st August last year at half an hour’s notice. A note was delivered to him by the Minister’s private secretary, and in that note he was informed that the post of Secretary for Tourism was to be abolished the very next day. [Interjections.]

This much we know. We know this from the hon. the Minister, because he replied to questions which I asked him in this House. We know this also from Press reports. I want to ask the hon. the Minister for what reason Mr. Steyn was dismissed from his post. [Interjections.] Die Burger of 3rd September, 1971, reported as follows under the heading “Steyn en Waring het vasgesit”—

What did Mr. Steyn say about this matter? In the same edition of Die Burger, the following is reported—

I want to ask the hon. the Minister if Mr. Steyn had any right of appeal against the decision. It is apparent that he made no appeal. In the case of appointments, the Public Service Commission makes recommendations to the Minister concerned and in the case of dismissals, the Public Service Commission also makes recommendations to the Minister. But in this particular case his post was abolished and the post of secretary of the Department of Tourism was in fact downgraded. This could only have been done by the Cabinet and it must have been done by the Cabinet on the strength of the recommendations and the suggestions of the hon. the Minister.

And then they say they are fighting for the Afrikaner.

What reasons were given? According to one Press report the reason was “botsende persoonlikhede”; according to others it was “because the post of secretary of the Department of Tourism was not justified”. If there were personality reasons—I admit that Mr. Steyn is a very outspoken man with a strong personality—what did Mr. Steyn say that was wrong? Whom did he criticize? Did he disagree with the Minister and, if so, on what grounds did he disagree with the Minister? I want to ask the Minister specifically whether he had any complaints about the conduct of Mr. Steyn. If he did have any complaints about the conduct of Mr. Steyn, did he lay those complaints before the Public Service Commission? Or, Sir, did the Minister advocate the downgrading of the head of his own department? If he did, why did he do so? It was a bigger department than ever before and it had more staff than ever before. There was a need for strong leadership in that department, a need for drive and enthusiasm, and there was a greater public awareness in the Republic of the importance of tourism. Why then was that post downgraded?

What else do we know, Sir? We know that Mr. Steyn, after 36 years of public service, was prematurely put on pension at the age of 58 years, seven years before the official date of retirement, at a considerable financial loss to himself and at a loss to himself of the various benefits that go with the important post of Secretary for Tourism. He was given a public slap in the face. What else did Mr. Steyn say? If I may say so, Mr. Steyn seems to have conducted himself with considerable dignity in the face of considerable provocation. Mr. Steyn said—

Then it goes on—

It goes on to say—

Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the Minister to take this House into his confidence and to say why it is that this man, with 36 years’ service, first of all with the Department of Defence, should have been relieved of his post. He held a very responsible post; that post was abolished, for reasons known to the Minister, after he had done wonderful service for the Republic. He built up this department from a department which was a new department, with a small number of personnel, to a larger and more important department. The Minister must tell us why this man should have been given half an hour’s notice to leave his post, the post of Secretary for Tourism. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, in the first place I want to apologise to you and to the Committee for not having been present in the House at 8 o’clock. I know it is not the practice to congratulate an hon. member on his maiden speech after another hon. member has already congratulated him, but I want to do so. I do so not only because his speech was such a good one, but also because he represents a place like Oudtshoom. I know Oudtshoorn well, and to my mind Oudtshoorn is an example to South Africa. It is an example not only because of the Kango Caves and its ostriches, but also because the kindness of the people there makes a tourist feel so welcome. Theirs is the right spirit we must show in South Africa, and that is to welcome tourists who visit our country in the same way as they do.

†I wanted to react immediately to a matter which was originally raised by the member for East London City, and also just now by the member for Simonstown.

Hon. members.

If the hon. member wants it that way—the hon. member for East London City and the hon. member for Simonstown.

We don’t want it that way; tradition wants it that way.

I would point out to hon. members on that side of the House that they on many occasions do not refer to us as “hon. members”. However, let me take up this issue which was raised by these two hon. members. I want to tackle this issue now, but let me, in passing, say to the hon. member for Durban Point that he made a big song and dance about the fact that “ek ’n Engelsman is en dat die Afrikaners aan hierdie kant van die Raad voel dat daardie R16 000 of R19 000 darem baie is vir ’n Engelssprekende”. I would like to say to him that I think that the shadow Minister of Tourism on that side, the old Ossewa-Brandwag-generaal … [Interjections.] I say that because I am used to this sort of cheap gibe. I think the gibe can just as well be placed upon the head of the hon. member for East London City as it can be on mine. Now, let me get to the matter that was raised by the hon. member for Simonstown. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. the member for Smithfield must contain himself.

Whereas I listened and was quite happy to reply in the language which I intended to reply to the hon. member for East London City, I must say that the hon. member for Simonstown, in my opinion, really went beyond all bounds of what I consider to be parliamentary decency.

Order! The hon. the Minister must withdraw that.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the word “decency”, but I will say parliamentary privilege. I will tell the House why.

Order! The hon. the Minister must withdraw those words too.

I withdraw the words “parliamentary privilege”. I will then say to the hon. member that if there is one thing that, to my mind, is not to the credit of this House, it is the bandying of the name of an official across the floor of this House. [Interjections.] The hon. member went out of his way to say that it was a scandalous thing on my part.

Unless you give an explanation.

Order!

He said it was a scandalous thing on my part. He used that sort of language. I now want to give the whole background to the situation. I am not going to mention the person’s name. I will refer to him as the incumbent of the position of Secretary. The hon. member for East London City never mentioned the person’s name and I respect him for that, but the hon. member for Simonstown did. Let me put it to the House this way: On the establishment of the Department of Tourism in 1961 and up to October, 1966, the Secretary of the department had the rank of deputy secretary. Members will remember that in October, 1966, because of a redundancy that occurred in the Department of Defence …

Redundancy?

Yes, a redundancy,

because the Commissioner-General became what amounted to Secretary of the department. He became redundant to the department of Defence.

Which Commissioner-General?

I am sorry, the commandant-General. He became redundant. He then became a full Secretary to the Department of Tourism. In fact, he was absorbed into the Department of Tourism by making an additional post available to him. Over the years I considered the incumbent not suitable as Secretary for Tourism.

Why?

Order! Will the hon. members give the hon. the Minister an opportunity to reply to the questions put to him?

I considered him unsuitable as a Secretary for the Department of Tourism. I considered that it was in the interests of the Department of Tourism and the tourist industry that things should not be allowed to continue in this way.

In what way?

In the way it was with this person acting as Secretary. I recommended—and I take the responsibility for it—to the Public Service Commission that the post of Secretary for Tourism should be downgraded or regraded to that of deputy secretary, as it previously was.

What about yourself?

I recommended that to the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether he informed the incumbent beforehand that he found him unsuitable and that he would recommend to the Public Service Commission that the post be downgraded?

Mr. Chairman, I may tell the hon. member for South Coast that at the time when these decisions were taken by the Public Service Commission, the hon. member was on leave on safari. [Interjections.] I am answering the hon. member for South Coast, not the hon. member for Simonstown. [Interjections.] That is my reply to the hon. member for South Coast.

Which hon. member was on safari?

The incumbent of the post of Secretary. [Interjections.]

Order! I appeal to hon. members to show the hon. the Minister the same courtesy as he extended to them when they put questions to him.

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

No. [Interjections.]

Order! The hon. the Minister may proceed.

Mr. Chairman, the Public Service Commission then submitted a recommendation to me which I accepted. This recommendation was that the post of Secretary of Tourism be downgraded to that of senior deputy secretary. This resulted in the redundancy of the present holder, I repeat, in the redundancy of the present holder of the post of Secretary of Tourism.

Was that also while he was away?

Order!

The third recommendation was that he should be retired from the Public Service. I accepted the recommendations and that is the position as it stands. I have always heard from hon. members that they consider that the department should be run efficiently. I as Minister had to make a decision as to what I thought would be in the best interests of the department, and that was the decision I reached. I know the hon. member for Simonstown. The hon. member for Simonstown will create an unpleasant atmosphere about anything, and he will do it if he thinks he can score a point against the Government; he will do anything and he is known for this in this House. I want to say another thing and that is that I am prepared to show confidential papers to a man in the Opposition benches for whom I have always had the greatest regard. I am referring to the Leader of the Opposition. If the Leader of the Opposition would like further information and further confidential papers I will show them to (him. But I will not show them to the hon. member for Simonstown.

Hear, hear!

I want to come back to my hon. friend, the hon. member for East London City. I am sorry that the report of the department came out late. All I can tell him is that it has nothing to do with me or the department. In fact, I had this report flown down from the Government printer directly to me in order to be able to present it, as I thought, at least a day or so before the Committee started discussing this Vote. On the other hand, the hon. member will appreciate that the Hotel Board’s report reached him well in time, and the same applies to Satour’s report. This was the only report in respect of which there was a delay by the Government Printer, a delay which I could not obviate.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? Will the hon. Minister tell us when he submitted the report for printing to the Government Printer?

I shall ask my department. All I can tell the hon. member is this.

While Steyn was overseas?

It was sent to the Government Printer over three weeks ago.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? I want to ask him why it is that this report, contrary to practice, does not show the date which is always reflected on a report submitted to a Minister.

I gather that this is a major issue with the hon. member for Durban Point. I have just asked the department and they tell me that it must be due to an error by the Government Printer. The hon. member made a big issue out of the fact that the number of registered hotels is shown as 1 218 instead of 1 213. I know why he is doing that. He is trying to pull a red herring across the floor of the House, because this is the hon. member who said on previous occasions that no hotel, or very few hotels, would ever register with the Hotel Board. Is that right or not?

Are you giving the red herring five stars?

You see, Sir, the hon. member made that statement, and he is upset that the Hotel Board has had the success that it has had in that, I should imagine, over 95 per cent of the hotels in this country have registered with the Hotel Board.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? May I ask the hon. the Minister whether he regards it as a matter of pride that there are some 400 fewer licensed hotels today than there were when he took over the control of hotels?

I would like to tell him that the Hotel Board will not register a hotel which is not up to a certain standard. If I remember correctly, it was those members on that side of the House who complained about the standard of some of the hotels in this country. Now, because they are not registered, he asks whether I am proud of the fact that certain hotels have not been registered. They have not been registered, because they have not been able to conform to the minimum standards laid down for a one-star hotel.

But you just said they would all register.

I said 95 per cent of the hotels are registered with the Hotel Board. The hon. member for Durban Point knows what he said previously. He knows that he said that registration was going to be an absolute failure and now he finds that a successful arrangement has been made by the Hotel Board. He can talk as much as he likes. I know him well. I cannot get angry with him, but these are the facts.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question?

My time is up; I will answer tomorrow.

I want to say to hon. members that one of the troubles they have is the fact that they are very disappointed with the figures of tourists that have come to this country. I have just been given the figures for 1971 by Satour. Just listen to this. During 1971 our overseas market sectors yielded a 34 per cent increase, compared with a world increase of 7 per cent. They mention that from the areas adjoining South Africa, for example Rhodesia—, the term they use is “overborder countries” as against “oversea countries”—the increase has only been 6 per cent. But this was something that we expected; because we realized that in the case of Rhodesia we had reached almost the optimum. We are now pulling in more and more people from overseas. When I tell hon. members that in 1960 the ratio between tourists from overborder countries and tourists from oversea countries was four to one, and that now it is practically one to one, they will realize what a tremendous increase there has been in the number of oversea tourists who come to this country. These are the facts. That is why they find themselves in great difficulties in criticizing the development of tourism in South Africa. [Interjections.] The total figure of tourists who came here in 1971 was 459 000. In their days the number of tourists was under 100 000. Naturally they object to and criticize the fact that this Government has increased the tourist figure to 459 000. This year, on the basis of the monthly figures that we get, it will reach a figure of ½ million before the end of the year. That, in our opinion, is a satisfactory figure, regardless of all the talk of explosions and that sort of nonsense that we get from that side of the House.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported.