I move—

This Bill is the outcome of lengthy and intensive research not only in South Africa but in various parts of the world. My predecessor, the hon. the Minister of the Interior, had intended submitting a Bill of this nature to the House last year, but in the circumstances it was not possible to do so and on this occasion I want to convey to him my thanks for the work done by him in this connection. If my hon. predecessor knew what a lengthy speech I have to make here this afternoon to explain the principles of this Bill, he would understand why I wish that it was he who had to make this second reading speech rather than myself.

This Bill is the outcome of lengthy research. It is based on the best that science can offer. I believe that it will benefit the mining industry, the workers and the owners and that it will certainly be one of the most modern pieces of legislation of its kind in the world.

Since 1911, when legislation was introduced in connection with miner’s phthisis, or pneumoconiosis as it is called to-day, this House has already had to give its attention to this matter on 17 occasions. The mining industry is a living industry which constantly expands. Mining methods continually change and improve and scientific and technological research in connection with diseases caused by dust and the prevention of those diseases takes place continually. Economic and social conditions also change continually, and it has been essential therefore to revise this legislation from time to time so as to adapt it to the ever-changing circumstances; to put into practice new knowledge and experience and to give proper protection to workers in the mining industry against the dangers of dust and to compensate and to take care of those whose health is prejudicially affected by dust. Once again, for the eighteenth time, this House is being asked to give its attention to this problem of dust diseases in the mining industry and to the care of workers who are affected by these diseases and to the care of their dependants. Let me say at once that I make no apologies for the fact that the time of this House has to be taken up once again with this matter. The fact that precisely six years after the last consolidating legislation was passed by this House, a comprehensive measure again has to be submitted to the House for consideration, is proof on the one hand of the importance of this matter and, on the other hand, of the Government’s earnest desire to see that justice is done to those who assist, and often sacrifice their health, in keeping the economy of our country healthy and in expanding it.

The mining industry, particularly the gold mining industry, still remains, next to the agricultural industry, one of the cornerstones of our economic structure, and it is of national importance therefore that we should continually look after the weal and woe of the industry and its workers.

Before reviewing this Bill, it might be as well to give the House a brief outline of the background against which this measure should be viewed.

The first positive step in the struggle against pneumoconiosis (miner’s phthisis) on the part of the authorities was taken as far back as 1902 when Lord Milner appointed a Commission “to investigate the incidence of this disease, to determine the causes of it and to recommend preventive and curative measures”.

This commission brought to light an extremely serious state of affairs in the gold mines and declared that preventive measures were absolutely essential. Important recommendations were made in connection with dust-control and other measures to prevent miner’s phthisis. The findings and recommendations of this commission led to the passing of the Mines and Works Act of 1911 and the Miners’ Phthisis Act of the same year.

Since then this problem has continually received the attention of the authorities. In the course of the years more than 20 commissions and departmental committees have repeatedly investigated the medical, technical, social and administrative aspects of the problem of pneumoconiosis in the mining industry. There are few other subjects which have been investigated so regularly and so exhaustively as the pneumoconiosis problem. From the economic point of view, it is practically impossible to assess the role that pneumoconiosis played and is still playing at the present time. On a very conservative basis it is estimated that in the mining industry alone pneumoconiosis has cost South Africa more than R700,000,000. This amount only represents direct or actual expenditure in connection with compensation, the administration of legislation, research and scientific and other preventive measures. Then there are still the indirect consequences such as loss of production and the burden which the death of the breadwinner places in so many spheres upon the shoulders of the State a burden which can never be assessed in terms of money.

The administration of the pneumoconiosis legislation, compensation of pneumoconiosis sufferers and their dependants, research in connection with pneumoconiosis and preventive measures, are costing this country more than R16,000,000 per annum at present.

Compensation and other forms of monetary assistance to pneumoconiosis sufferers and their dependants have cost this country R142,013,459 from 1911 up to 31 March of this year. Over the past 12 financial years a sum of R77,289,107 has been paid out to beneficiaries, which is about R12,000,000 more than the amount paid out in the previous period of nearly 40 years from 1911 to 1950.

The seriousness of this matter is borne out by the fact that pneumoconiosis in the mining industry alone is costing the White section of the population something like R6 per annum per head at present.

Accurate statistical data to show the loss of manpower as the result of pneumoconiosis are not available unfortunately but it is conservatively estimated that over the past 50 years the mining industry has lost more than 30,000 White workers as the result of pneumoconiosis while more than 300,000 Bantu workers have already contracted this disease.

It is clear therefore that this is a matter which continually deserves the serious attention of the Government and of this House.

Fortunately this matter also has its bright side and as far as the future is concerned there is reason to be optimistic. Our mining methods have improved so much during the past 50 years that the danger of pneumoconiosis, although it has not been eliminated and although the likelihood is that we shall never be able to eliminate it completely, has been reduced considerably.

At the beginning of this century the workers in the gold mines contracted miner’s phthisis after an average service of only three years. The average period of service of miners who show the earliest symptoms of pneumoconiosis at the present time is between 23 and 25 years. Fifty years ago the average life expectation of the phthisis sufferer, after having contracted the disease, was less than two years. To-day we know that pneumoconiosis, where complications do not arise, does not cause death and that it probably does not diminish the life expectation of the pneumoconiosis sufferer.

The explanation for this is that the acute form of pneumoconiosis (massive fibrosis of the lung), which is caused by very high dust concentrations, very seldom occurs in this country to-day as the result of the improvement in dust-prevention measures. In addition to that, effective medical control is exercised over workers in the mining industry to-day and people with physical defects which may reduce their resistance to pneumoconiosis, are not allowed to work in mines where they are exposed to dust.

Equally good progress has been made on the medical side, and South Africa’s achievements in this sphere are known to the whole world. The research that was undertaken by our old research workers like Drs. Simpson, Strachan (pronounced Strawhawn) and Mavrocordato, to mention just a few, to this day still forms the basis of modern knowledge with regard to the effect of silica dust on the lungs of the individual. The war years interrupted this research but since 1948 and particularly over the past six years medical research has again been undertaken intensively as a joint effort on the part of the Government and the mining industry. Intensive research is also being done in various other countries, amongst others England, Belgium, Germany, France and the U.S.A., and our knowledge in the medical sphere has increased enormously over the past ten years. As far as pneumoconiosis is concerned, it can be said that in this sphere too, as in all branches of medicine, our knowledge has increased enormously. Medical knowledge with regard to this disease and its effect on the human system has also made fantastic progress in recent times and we have reason to face the future with optimism.

After this brief outline of the background I want to confine myself now to the Bill which is before the House for consideration and I want to mention four reasons why it is necessary, only six years after the last comprehensive measure was passed by this House, to revise the existing legislation once again.

In the first place there are certain administrative problems which are being experienced in implementing the Pneumoconiosis Act of 1956, which have to be overcome. Secondly it has become necessary to revise certain scientific concepts on which that Act was based and to adapt them to the latest scientific knowledge. Thirdly, there are certain unsatisfactory aspects in connection with the financing of the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund which have to be removed and rectified. Fourthly, it has become necessary to make certain adjustments in connection with the basis on which compensation is paid as well as in the scales of compensation.

I want to give hon. members an outline of this Bill under the aforementioned four heads, and let me say at once that the fact that this bulky measure is before the House to-day does not mean that the legislation of 1956 is wrong or ineffective. It still remains a very great improvement on the legislation that we had before that date. Since 1956, however, my Department has continued to make an intensive study of all the aspects which the Act embraces, and various missions have been sent overseas for this purpose. Research, as I have already indicated, has also made tremendous strides in the past few years and it would be an unforgiveable injustice towards mine-workers not to give them the benefit of the very latest knowledge. Indeed research would be useless if the results that it produces are not applied to the advantage of the workers and of the mining industry.

This Bill retains all the improvements brought about by the Act of 1956 and simply extends them.

I now come to administrative matters. In the practical implementation of the Act the definitions in the Act of 1956 of certain basic terms have been found inadequate and have given rise to administrative problems. The following definitions in particular have caused difficulties: Firstly, the definition of dusty atmosphere. The Act of 1956 declares certain places in and on mines in respect of all mines to be “dusty atmosphere” and other places may be so declared by the Minister. No distinction can be drawn between the various types of mines and between individual mines. What is dusty atmosphere at one mine is also dusty atmosphere at another mine. That is not fair towards the mines because it does not take into account the different mines and gives no recognition to individual mine-owners for their particular efforts to improve working conditions.

The definition is now being amended in such a way that no place in or on a mine will automatically be declared to be dusty atmosphere. The Minister will lay down by way of notice in the Government Gazette which places in and on mines will be regarded as dusty atmosphere for the purposes of the Act and it will now be possible therefore to draw a distinction between various types of mines and even between individual mines.

This change will in no way detract from the medical control over workers and from their right to compensation. Certain occupations on certain mines where dust tests indicate that there is no danger of pneumoconiosis, can be thrown open in this way to persons who are unable to-day to pass the strict medical screening.

Secondly, I come to the terms “mine” and “mining operation”. The definitions of these terms are being brought into line with the definitions of the same terms in the Mines and Works Act, in the first place to bring about uniformity as far as the actions of my Department’s various divisions are concerned, and, secondly, to bring about a clear demarcation between the fields which are covered by the Pneumoconiosis Act and the Workmen’s Compensation Act, respectively. At present there is a certain amount of overlapping between these two Acts.

Thirdly I come to the term “owner” The definition of “owner” is being revised so as to facilitate the determination of the ownership of a mine. At the present time it is often practically impossible, with a view to the collection of levies, to determine with certainty who the owner of a mine is.

Then I come to the question of medical control over mine workers. There are still complaints that the examinations of the Pneumoconiosis Bureau are superficial and inadequate. This complaint has also been made by hon. members in this House from time to time.

To some extent this complaint is justified in view of the fact that the Bureau in conducting periodic examinations really confines itself only to the chest of the mine worker and does not carry out the clinical examination which is done in a hospital, for example. The position is that the periodic certificates which the Bureau issues are not certificates of general good health or of physical fitness for work. It is purely a certificate which indicates that the mine worker does not suffer either from tuberculosis or from pneumoconiosis in a stage which prevents him from continuing to work in a dusty atmosphere. It often happens therefore that periodic certificates are issued to people who, because of other ailments or physical defects, are entirely unfit for work of any character. Because the purpose of the Bureau’s periodic certificate is wrongly interpreted, it often creates great dissatisfaction and lack of confidence in the efficiency of the Bureau and the capabilities of its medical staff.

This matter is being rectified therefore. In the future these periodic examinations will be full clinical examinations and periodic certificates will really be certificates of fitness for work in a dusty atmosphere. In the future then the Bureau’s certificates will be called certificates of fitness.

The Bureau already has the power under the Act of 1956 to withdraw certificates. This power is being emphasized more pertinently in this Bill, and the object of that is that the Bureau should make use of it more often where it is clear that as the result of serious illness, continued employment in a mine may endanger the health of the person concerned or the safety of his fellow-workers. It goes without saying that this power will be exercised with the greatest circumspection to ensure that mine workers are not unnecessarily prejudiced.

When the Bureau carries out fuller examinations other ailments requiring treatment will also be brought to light more often. Unless such ailments are timeously treated, the object of these fuller examinations by the Bureau will be defeated. What is envisaged therefore is closer liaison between the Bureau and private medical practitioners and medical aid societies to ensure that diseases which require medical treatment are given the necessary attention timeously. The Bureau itself cannot, of course, prescribe the treatment.

Perhaps I might just say here that in spite of the criticism of the Bureau, which is frequently without foundation and often mala fide, the medical control that we exercise over workers in the mining industry is regarded as the best and held up as a model internationally. This Bill removes certain existing defects and further tightens up this control.

As far as Bantu labourers are concerned, one important change is being brought about. At the present time compulsory medical examinations are only compulsory for Bantu employed in a dusty atmosphere; workers employed on the surface are not examined.

The pre-employment examination and the regular periodic examination of working Bantu are aimed at tuberculosis in particular. It is found, however, that the control over and the prevention of tuberculosis is not as effective as it ought to be because workers employed on the surface who continually come into contact with underground workers, are not subjected to the same medical control. This defect is now being remedied and the same medical examinations are being made compulsory for Bantu workers employed on the surface.

I may also add that the control which the Bantu exercises over the medical examination of Bantu workers has been overhauled. There are still defects, however, and some mines are inclined to omit to fulfil their obligations properly. So we find that the use of miniature X-ray films are not always effective. This matter is, however, receiving attention and unless the necessary degree of effectiveness is achieved, I will not hesitate to have serious action taken to make it compulsory that even larger X-ray plates should be taken. In this connection I wish to repeat that tuberculosis is not an occupational disease. It is an ordinary contagious disease and it can be effectively combated if the sources of the contagion are effectively controlled. The whole object is to detect tuberculosis as early as possible so that treatment which is very effective to-day with our modern cures, can be commenced timeously. There cannot be effective control, however, if a large percentage of the workers are not subjected to regular medical examination. I view this matter in a very serious light and I will not hesitate to have serious action taken if the necessary effectiveness is not obtained under existing measures.

Certification of mine workers: Hon. members will remember that in terms of the 1956 Act the function to certify mine workers for the purposes of compensation was taken away from the Bureau and transferred to an independent statutory committee known as the Certification of Pneumoconiosis Committee. The old Medical Silicosis Board of Appeal was abolished at the same time.

Except for the fact that the certifying committee has the right to revise its own findings either of its own accord or at the request of the aggrieved person, there is no machinery in existence at the present moment to appeal against the findings of the certification committee.

Various persons and bodies have been making representations from time to time for the re-introduction of the Appeal Board. Hon. members have also from time to time pleaded in this House for the re-introduction of a body of appeal.

This matter has received serious consideration and I am satisfied that a need does exist for some form of appeal or other. I cannot, however, agree to the re-introduction of a body of appeal which will itself be able to certify and reject or amend the findings of the primary certification body. Such a procedure always gives rise to friction between the two bodies and to the playing off of the one body against the other. The confidence which the mine worker has in either of the two bodies or in both is usually undermined as a result.

Another form of appeal has, therefore, been decided upon and the Bill provides for the introduction of a body of revision which will consist of not fewer than three and not more than four experienced medical men. This body will have the right, either of its own accord or at the request of the aggrieved person to revise the findings of the Certification Committee. This revision body will not have the right, however, to certify off its own bat or to set aside or amend the findings of the Certification Committee. In cases where it does differ from the findings of the Certification

Committee the relevant findings will be reconsidered at a joint sitting of the two bodies.

The introduction of this body meets a need, not only as far as the mine workers are concerned, but also as far as the Certification Committee is concerned. It creates the machinery whereby the work of the Certification Committee can be controlled and checked. This body will be able to do very useful work and I may say that its establishment has been generally welcomed, also by the Certification Committee itself.

Control over mines: I am gratified to be able to say that great progress has already been made with the controlling of mines. Ten years ago the silicosis legislation of the day was only applicable to the big gold mines but in a short space of time of less than 10 years all the other important mines have been brought under control with the result that all gold mines, coal mines, diamond mines, copper mines, asbestos mines, chrome mines, tin mines, platinum mines and numerous other mines have already been declared to be controlled mines. Recently a great number of quarries have been declared controlled mines and we are actively proceeding to declare all mines and quarries where the possibility of contracting pneumoconiosis exists, controlled mines.

My Department has, however, encountered practical problems in the control of mines In terms of the 1956 Act I can declare any mine a controlled mine if I am satisfied that the workers in that mine have contracted pneumoconiosis or are likely to contract it. It is not always possible, however, to prove that the danger of pneumoconiosis exists in a particular mine on the strength of real cases of pneumoconiosis. The reason for this is that the results which are obtained by a medical survey can be influenced by a great many factors and even render them completely useless for practical purposes. For example, reliable conclusions can only be drawn from a medical survey if a sufficient number of persons have worked for an interrupted period of at least 20 years or longer in that particular mine. Where persons have been working in different mines, no reliable conclusions can be drawn.

Internationally it is accepted, however, that any dust containing at least 10 per cent free-silica constitutes a definite pneumoconiosis danger and will ultimately affect the health of the workers adversely. That is particularly the case where silica dust mixes with other kinds of dust. Silica has the peculiar effect of rendering harmful other kinds of dust which are apparently harmless by themselves.

This Bill now makes provision for the automatic control of all mines and all other mines in which the ore which is mined contains at least 10 per cent free-silica. Only in cases where the free-silica is less than 10 per cent will it still be necessary to try to prove by means of dust tests and medical surveys that a pneumoconiosis danger exists.

In this way practically all the mines in the Republic will automatically be controlled in view of the fact that there are very few mines with less than 10 per cent free-silica.

I can only say that the moment a mine is declared a controlled mine the dust prevention measures laid down by the Mines and Works Act and the regulations promulgated in terms thereof immediately become applicable to it. That immediately entitles all the workers in such a mine to compensation if they contract pneumoconiosis or tuberculosis and the workers immediately become subject to the medical control prescribed by the pneumoconiosis legislation. It is in the interests of the workers, therefore, that it is essential that every mine where the pneumoconiosis danger exists be declared a controlled mine and the changes which are contemplated in this Bill will considerably facilitate and expedite action by my Department.

No fundamental change is being made to the granting and the payment of compensation. As in the past the compensation will in each case be awarded by the General Council for Pneumoconiosis Compensation which will replace the existing Pneumoconiosis Council and be paid by the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Commissioner.

The compensation of the Board, is, however, being revised and amended. At the moment the Board consists of ten members of whom six are Public servants (except in the case of one they are all connected to the office of the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Commissioner) and two are nominated by the mine owners and two are nominated by the mine workers.

The duties and powers of the council are clearly circumscribed, and as far as the compensation to be awarded is concerned the council has practically no discretion. It is not necessary, therefore to have so many Public Servants on the Council and except in the case of the Commissioner who is chairman of the council by virtue of his position they are being removed from the council and the new council will consist of not less than eight and not more than 12 members who will be nominated on an equal basis by the mine owners and the mine workers. The council, is, therefore. being made more representative of the mine workers on the one hand and of the mining industry on the other hand.

Apart from its present functions it is envisaged that the council will be able to serve as a co-ordinating body between the various mine and employee interests and will act as the mouthpiece of those interests in so far as matters concerning the administration of the pneumoconiosis legislation are concerned.

For the rest there are some minor administrative amendments in order to facilitate and expedite the granting and payment of benefits.

Basis of compensation: One of the most important amendments proposed in this Bill is in connection with the basis on which compensation is paid for pneumoconiosis.

At the moment, for the purpose of compensation, pneumoconiosis is divided into four stages as follows based on the extent to which the ability to do physical labour has been impaired: first stage—fit to do normal physical labour; second stage—fit to do moderate physical labour; third stage—fit to do any light physical labour; fourth stage—unfit to do any physical labour.

The position is, however, that subjectively, physical labour and impairment of ability to perform physical labour are conceptions which are not circumscribed and which cannot be circumscribed.

As far as can be ascertained nowhere in the world is their clarity or agreement as to what these conceptions actually mean or as to what should be used as the yardstick in order to determine a person’s physical ability to perform physical labour. There are so many factors which can influence the person’s ability to perform physical labour. As for example, factors such as personal adaptation, proficiency, environment, working conditions, psychological orientation and approach, personal habits, social and economic disposition and many more, all of which can have an important effect on a person’s ability to perform physical labour. In order to be able to determine to any degree of certainty the extent to which any one particular physical condition, pneumoconiosis in this case, has impaired the person’s ability to perform physical labour, it will be necessary to determine the effect of each one of these additional or incidental factors and to leave it out of account. The doctor will have to know about all these things and he will also have to know what particular work each mine worker does and the extent of the physical exertion which will be required of a normal, healthy person of comparable age, physique etc., to perform that work.

It is obviously impossible to know all these things or to determine them and that is why loss of ability to work is a very unsatisfactory and unjust basis when it comes to determining the extent of the damage which a person has suffered and the compensation to be paid for such damage.

Pneumoconiosis is a lung disease which is caused by the inhalation of harmful dust and the damage which that causes is first of all impairment of his ability to breathe which in turn reduces his ability to exert himself physically, that is to say, his ability to do hard work. He must therefore, be compensated for the primary damage and not only for the ultimate results thereof.

The underlying reason for the dissatisfaction amongst so many mine workers and the criticism which is so often directed at the Pneumoconiosis Bureau is the determination and grading of the disability as a result of the loss of the ability to perform physical labour. I also want to admit that that dissatisfaction and criticism is justified to some extent. I want to state very clearly, however, that the reason for that is not, as is so often alleged, that the Bureau is incompetent or that it adopts an unsympathetic attitude but it is exclusively due to the unscientific avoid subjective basis on which that disability has to be determined. The doctors are expected to do things which they simply cannot do. The fault does not lie with them but with the legislation.

Attempts have been made everywhere to find a more correct and scientific basis on which to determine the inability. Here in our own country this matter has been receiving attention for many years and a great deal of research has already been done in this connection.

The impairment to the cardio-respiratory functions seems to offer the solution to the problem and that is why provision is made in this Bill for the determination and grading of the disability on the strength of the impairment to the cardio-respiratory functions.

Some of the greatest experts in this country and overseas have been consulted in regard to the question of taking the extent of the impairment to the heart and lung functions as a basis for determining the extent of the disability which is the direct result of pneumoconiosis and they are all agreed that not only is that a more scientific and objective approach but that it is also a more just approach as far as the worker is concerned. They are also agreed that with modem clinical methods which include tests of the lung functions, the impairment of the heart and lung functions can be tested very accurately to-day.

I wish to state very clearly that while it is essential to test the function of the lungs if you wish to use this as your basis, the certification and grading of pneumoconiosis will not take place on the strength of those tests alone. It is only an additional method which will be employed to augment the present clinical and radio logical methods.

The experiences of the specialist at his clinical examination, the result of the lung function tests, the industrial history and the radio logical diagnosis constitute the four important and essential requirements.

I also wish to state very clearly that the discretion of the certification committee is not in any way being curtailed or restrained. As a matter of fact more powers and freedom are being given to the committee so that it can come to a sound decision and judge each case on its merits.

For the purposes of compensation the impairment of the cardio-respiratory functions will be divided into three groups or grades, namely 20 per cent to 50 per cent, over 50 per cent to 75 per cent and over 75 per cent. A loss of less than 20 per cent of the ability to breath is regarded as normal and in future there will be only three compensative stages, each of which will carry a pension.

Some experts in the field of testing the lung function state that impairment of the ability to breathe can be as accurately assessed as 1 per cent. I do not for one moment doubt that it can indeed be done as accurately as that but for the purposes of the Bill that is not necessary in view of the fact that lung disability has been grouped into wide categories.

Let me also say that members of this House (Drs. Radford and Fisher) on various occasions pleaded for the grading of disability on the basis for which the Bill makes provision. The idea is therefore not new, but medical science had to make sure that it could apply reliable methods to measure this type of disability. For that reason missions were sent overseas, and a report was submitted to the effect that sufficient progress had been made during recent years to be able to establish it with certainty.

I now pass on to compensation. I have already said that in future there will be only three compensatory stages, for each of which a pension will be paid. The payment of the present benefit of a lump sum payment of R960 therefore falls away in the case of mine workers who have not previously been certified, and they are compensated for its loss by an increased pension in the future second and third pension stadia. Persons who have already received the lump sum payment of R960 retain the present pension scales, except for persons who are at present receiving the fourth-stage pension or who are at present in the third stage and who on re-classification are classed in the group above 75 per cent. In these cases an increase of R15 per month is granted. This increase is made possible by incorporating in the pension the present nursing allowance of R15. It amounts to this, that all present fourth-stage pensioners and all future pensioners in the group above 75 per cent disability will receive this nursing allowance by way of a pension.

The future first compensatory stage, i.e. the 20 per cent to 50 per cent group, carries the same pension as the present second stage and the future second compensatory stage, i.e. the group above 50 per cent to 75 per cent will receive an increase of R10 per month. A mine worker with a wife and one dependent child will then receive R64 per month instead of the present R54. The future third compensatory stage, i.e. the group above 75 per cent disability, receives an increase of R23 a month on the present fourth-stage pension.

The mine worker who at present receives a monthly pension of R50 in respect of himself will therefore receive a monthly pension of R65 if previously he had already received the lump sum payment of R960, and the miner who will no longer receive that benefit will receive a monthly pension of R73. The increase is given in respect of the miner himself, so that everybody will receive the same increase and the unmarried miner or the widower will share in the increased pensions to the same extent as those who are married. The pensions of the widows and dependent children of deceased pneumoconiosis sufferers are being increased in the case of a widow from R25.50 per month to R30 per month, and in the case of a child from R12.75 a month to R15 a month. These increases are being granted to all existing beneficiaries. The pensions of Coloureds are being adapted proportionately.

It will perhaps be desirable to give an indication here of the effect the new basis of certification will have on the benefits. Firstly, I want to say that it is not the object to grant a general increase in benefits. Those who really needed relief are the miners who are in the last stage and are completely unable to earn anything, and the dependants of deceased miners. Therefore basic increases are being granted only to fourth-stage pensioners and to widows and dependent children.

No reliable correlation exists between the impairment of the respiratory function and eventual loss of working capacity. Impairment of the respiratory function can be determined at an earlier stage than loss of earning capacity, so that the application of the new basis of determining and grading incapacity will have the effect that mine workers will reach the various compensatory stadia earlier. Viewed as a whole, this new basis will therefore redound appreciably to the benefit of mine workers.

In the third place, this new set-up now for the first time affords an effective linking up of pneumoconiosis as a disease and the primary damage it does to the human system. Now for the first time we are therefore succeeding in linking up the old concepts of silicosis and chest diseases as a comprehensive sickness entity in our legislation, and with the discretion being given to the certifying committee, which they must exercise to the benefit of the mine worker, every mine worker whose health has been affected by breathing in dust can be assured of just treatment. I am convinced that in this legislation we are following the right course, and I should like to give the House the assurance that my Department and my expert advisers will do everything in their power to ensure the just and sympathetic application of it.

In respect of compensation for tuberculosis, one important change is being made. At present the miner with more than ten years underground service receives the benefit of a lump sum payment of R960 and a pension equal to the pension payable for pneumoconiosis in the third stage. In this case the lump sum benefit is increased to R2,000, which will be paid out over a period of 12 months. The benefit of R1,500 for the mine worker with less than ten years service in a dusty atmosphere remains unchanged.

The pension for the mine worker who has worked more than 3,000 shifts in a dusty atmosphere lapses as a right, but in its place the discretion is granted to the General Council for Pneumoconiosis Compensation, where the mine worker after proper treatment is still permanently incapacitated as the result of tuberculosis, to pay a special allowance which depending on his financial circumstances, may be equal to the pension he would otherwise have received.

The emphasis is laid here on treatment and rehabilitation. Tuberculosis is not an industrial disease. It is an ordinary infectious disease which can be very effectively treated by modern methods. However, medical men throughout the world are agreed that the tuberculosis sufferer should never again be exposed to breathing in harmful dust, however successful his treatment may have been. There is, however, no justification for paying to the cured tuberculosis sufferer a pension for the rest of his life.

The position is therefore now that the mine worker is put in the position of being able to rest and to receive treatment for 12 months without having any anxiety about his income. Thereafter, if as the result of the disease he still cannot earn sufficient, the necessary assistance can be given to him.

In regard to grants in connection with training, the amount made available as grants to beneficiaries in connection with the training of their dependants is being increased by R50,000, from R50,000 to R100,000 per annum, and in future this will also be used for university and university college education. Whereas this concession at present applies only to White mine workers, this assistance will now be granted to Coloureds also.

The amount of the grants which can be made in regard to burial expenses is being increased from R60 to R100. At the moment this assistance is available only to White mine workers, but in terms of this Bill Coloureds are now also being included. In their case the board can grant assistance up to R50.

In connection with compensation for persons who do not work in a dusty atmosphere, I just want to say this. In terms of the present Act, persons who contracted pneumoconiosis as the result of work on a mine which is not regarded as work in a dusty atmosphere, are excluded from benefits. The Bill makes provision for the payment of benefits for pneumoconiosis to all employees who have contracted pneumoconiosis as the result of their work in controlled mines, whether they work in a dusty atmosphere or not.

In so far as the conversion of part of the pensions concerned, I have already said that the benefit of a lump sum payment will not be granted in future. In order to meet the case of the mine worker who needs money for a justifiable purpose, and in order to obtain the funds for it, this Bill provides for the conversion of portion of his monthly pension (at most, half of it) for a period of at the most 24 months, into a lump sum payment.

In view of the fact that Bantu do not receive pensions but are removed from the mines at the very first signs of pneumoconiosis, the question of determing the degree of disability does not apply in their case. The basis of compensation in the case of Bantu is not being changed at all, and their compensation also remains unchanged.

In respect of the basis on which the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund is financed, drastic changes are being made. These changes particularly have reference to the apportionment of pneumoconiosis obligations between the State on the one hand and the mining industry on the other hand, and to the apportionment of the obligations of the industry between the various mines.

Here I may say that there are various aspects of the method according to which obligations are at present calculated and apportioned which are not satisfactory. That is so because in financing the fund pace was not kept with changed circumstances over the. past 40 years. The basis of financing to-day really differs very little from the basis laid down for it in the Act of 1919 and even before that. In the meantime the mining industry has expanded tremendously and great progress has been made in the scientific and technical sphere. These changed circumstances and increased technical and scientific knowledge should just as the progress made in the medical field from time to time has been incorporated in our legislation, also be acknowledged in our legislation when it comes to the financing of compensation and the apportionment of obligations. I shall try briefly to mention a few of the defects and to indicate how the Bill attempts to remedy them.

The Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund was established in 1911 in the form of the Old Miners Phthisis Fund, which was established by means of a contribution made by the State and an equal contribution which had to be collected from the mines. Out of this fund grants were made by the Old Miner’s Phthisis Board to persons suffering from phthisis. In 1912 the fund was changed into the Miners Phthisis Compensation Fund, into which the State paid a further amount of R200,000 derived from certain accumulated funds derived from mining leases. The rest of the funds required were provided by way of levies on producing mines.

In 1916 the principle of scheduled mines was introduced and further amounts were paid into the Compensation Fund by the State. In 1919 the legislation was consolidated, and the legislation passed that year prescribed the basis on which the required funds had to be levied from the mines. The levy of each mine-owner for every period of three months was constituted as follows:—

1. 45 per cent of his levy was in proportion to the amount he had paid out in wages during the previous three months;
2. 35 per cent of the levy was in proportion to his silicosis percentage, a factor which was calculated on the proportionate share of each mine of the total employment of persons who were certified during a specified period; and
3. 20 per cent of his levy was in proportion to his taxable income for the previous financial year.

Under this Act certain fines for contraventions in terms of the Mines and Works Act, which would otherwise have been credited to the Consolidated Revenue Fund, were paid into the Miners Phthisis Compensation Fund. The 1919 Act also introduced the principle of outstanding liability. Every mine which closed down had, on its closing, to pay over to the fund an amount equal to three-sevenths of the total amount which it had paid by way of levy during the seven years before its closing down. Mines therefore had to make provision in advance for these moneys which they had to pay into the Miners Phthisis Compensation Fund at the time they closed down. In terms of the 1925 legislation, security for these funds could be demanded from the mines to ensure that a mine would be able to meet its liabilities at the time it closed down. Security was accepted in the form of a trust fund, and this trust fund which still exists contains an amount of R18,519,658. When a mine closes down its share in the trust fund is paid over to the compensation fund. In 1946 the legislation was amended again and benefits were also increased.

Unlike in the case of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, increases under the pneumoconiosis legislation are awarded not only in respect of future beneficiaries but the increases are also granted to all persons who have already received benefits. This concession then has the effect that every time benefits are increased, retrospective outstanding liability is created. The increase in benefits granted in 1946 created a retrospective outstanding liability of R16,000,000 and the mines became liable for the full amount. In 1950 benefits were again increased and in respect of existing beneficiaries an additional retrospective liability of R18,000,000 was created. This was also debited to the mines. The additional outstanding liability created by the 1946 Act is being repaid by the mines to the compensation fund on the basis of taxable income, and the final installment is due in 1965. The 1950 additional outstanding liability is being paid in equal annual installments over a period of 20 years, and the last payment is due in 1971. Up to 1965 the gold mines, in respect of these two liabilities, must pay an annual amount of R1,951,446, or almost R2,000,000, and thereafter. until 1971, they must pay R1,077,830 every year. As at 31 March 1961, the mines, in respect of these two items, still owed R16,077,816, and together with the 1925 outstanding liability the mines at that date still owed an amount of R34,597,474 to the compensation fund. Of this amount, however, R18,519,658 has already been made available to the trust fund, so that they still have to pay R16,077,816. The 1946 outstanding liability is apportioned amongst the existing mines on the basis of taxable income, which means that only those mines which have a taxable income meet this liability. The repayment of this liability therefore has no relation to the share which every mine had in its creation. In this way the burden of one mine is placed on another, and even mines which started development after 1 August 1946, the date on which that liability became due, and now already have a taxable income, are held responsible for meeting that liability in which they have no share. This is most unfair towards such mines.

The basis on which the 1950 outstanding liability is divided amongst the various mines again has the effect that the older mines bear the heaviest burden in that regard. In the apportionment of the 1946 liability no scientific basis is applied to determine the share of every mine in that debt, whilst in the apportionment of the 1950 liability again, factors applied which cannot be justified scientifically. In general it amounts to this, that there is an inequitable and unjust apportionment of obligations, and that the liabilities of one mine are shifted on to another. However, I want to state clearly that the mines are not to be blamed for this. It is due to a defect in the previous legislation. In 1956 the benefits were once more increased and again a retrospective outstanding liability of R18,400,000 was created in respect of existing beneficiaries. Of this amount R13,800,000 was in respect of mines which were then still in existence, and R4,600,000 in respect of mines which had already closed down.

The Government realized that it was unreasonable to burden mines from time to time with large additional liabilities in respect of the retrospective increase of benefits, and particularly to burden existing mines with obligations which are really incurred in respect of mines which have already closed down. For that reason the Government decided to accept that liability and also to accept the additional outstanding liability created by the 1946 and the 1950 Acts in respect of mines which had then already been closed. This liability was calculated at R3,400,000, so that the State in 1956 accepted a total debt of R21,800,000 in respect of the gold mines. This liability is being paid at the rate of R1,000,000 per annum, and the State therefore at the moment still owes R20,106,629.

As the mines continue to develop, the workers are continually being exposed to dust. The total obligations of the compensation fund are estimated every year up to 31 March. Provision must therefore also be made from time to time for further damage caused to the health of the workers by dust and which will only later become apparent in the form of pneumoconiosis. Provision is made for this further damage by way of current levies on the mines. The mines obligations therefore consist of two elements, i.e. outstanding liabilities and current levies.

Levies are paid in quarterly installments, and in apportioning the payments between the various mines two factors are taken into consideration, namely the number of shifts worked in the previous quarter and the silicosis rate. I have already pointed out that the application of the silicosis rate in apportioning the obligation has the effect that the older mines are taxed more heavily than the newer mines. I also stated that that factor is not based on scientific principles.

The debt of the State was calculated once in 1956 and thereafter remained a constant factor for purposes of assessing the assets of the fund. The 1956 Act makes no provision for a recalculation of the State’s liability, whilst surpluses which were declared as the result of valuations of the fund since then indicate that it was probably calculated at too high a rate. Whilst the whole liability, therefore, assists in creating a surplus in the fund on such a valuation, the State receives only a proportionate amount of the surplus of that portion of the liability of mines which have closed down, and not of its total liability.

This is a defect in the 1956 Act, and unless it is remedied it will eventually have the effect that the State will pay more than it should really have paid. The Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund has therefore been built up through the meeting of their liabilities by the mines; by the payment of current levies by the mines; by payments made by the State to the old Miners’ Phthisis Fund, and by payment of the liabilities which the State accepted in 1956. Apart from other additional reasons, the State therefore has a direct interest in the manner in which the compensation fund is financed, and because the obligations in respect of pneumoconiosis compensation are regarded as operational expenses for purposes of taxation, the State also has an interest in the way in which those obligations are apportioned between the mines.

In the short survey I have given, I have pointed to two important defects in the present basis of financing of the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund. In the first place, there is the inequitable apportionment of obligations amongst the mines. That applies to outstanding liabilities and also to current levies. In the second place, there is the fact that the liability of the State cannot be re-calculated and that possibly inaccurate calculations cannot be remedied.

The Bill now tries to remedy these defects by way of an apportionment of the obligations to the fund between the State on the one hand and the mines on the other hand. Together with this apportionment of obligations, there will also be an apportionment of the assets of the fund between the State and the mine and a new basis for the apportionment of the collective obligations of the mines amongst the various mines.

At the time of the last valuation of the fund, i.e., as at 31 March 1961, the assets of the compensation fund in respect of Group A mines was R111,095,097. These assets include cash to the amount of R56,607,797, an amount of R34,597,474, which the mines still owed the fund, and an amount of R19,889,644 which the State still owed the fund. The actual obligations of the fund then amounted to R106,754,200, and there was therefore an accumulated surplus of R4,340,897 which still had to be repaid to the mines. This surplus consists of excess levies collected from the mines and which has to be repaid to them.

The Bill now proposes that the fund should be divided into three separate accounts, namely an A Account for Group A mines, a B Account for Group B mines, and a C Account for the State obligations. The A and B Accounts which will be financed by the mines will be responsible for the payment of benefits to all future beneficiaries, and the C Account, for which the State will be responsible, will be used for the payment of benefits to all existing beneficiaries.

The Bill also provides for a recalculation of the obligations of the fund and the apportionment thereof to the three separate accounts will take place on the basis of the recalculated obligations. Consequently I cannot at this stage give hon. members a reliable indication of the obligations with which each account will be debited.

I want to state clearly that there is no idea of relieving either the mines or the State of any of the obligations they have accepted. If on a recalculation of the obligations of the fund it is found that those obligations in the past were calculated at too high a rate, there will of course be some measure of relief for the mines and perhaps also for the State. These recalculations can, however, only be made after the coming into operation of the proposed legislation, and I can therefore give no indication of what the position will be. It may even be that the obligations are increased as the result of such recalculation. However, I trust that this will not be the case.

The apportionment of the cash assets of the fund will be done on the basis of the recalculated obligations, and the amount which will go to the C Account, i.e., the State’s account, is the difference between the recalculated obligations in respect of existing beneficiaries and the recalculated amount of the liability of the State. When the cash in its account is exhausted, the State will provide the funds which will be required from time to time to pay the benefits and other allowances to persons who have to be compensated from the State account. The obligations of the State are therefore simply being postponed, and the State is not exonerated from meeting them.

I have already mentioned that the mines accept responsibility for all persons who are certified for the first time after the coming into operation of this legislation. These obligations consist of two elements or factors. In the first place, there are the estimated obligations in respect of working miners or possible damage which they have already suffered and which is still latent, in other words, which may still become apparent in future in the form of certifiable pneumoconiosis. This damage already done will be calculated up to the date on which the legislation comes into force, and the amount so determined, less the cash credited to the A mines in the A Account from the cash assets of the compensation fund, will then constitute the collective outstanding liability of Group A mines.

In the second place, provision has to be made for damage suffered by persons employed in the mines after the coming into operation of this Bill. Provision for that will be made by way of levies on the mines from time to time. The outstanding liability of a mine will be payable when it closes down. The Bill therefore provides that mine-owners must provide security for their outstanding liability to ensure that they will be able to meet that liability when it becomes due. The intention is to accept the existing trust fund as security. Depending on the amount of the outstanding liabilities as determined on the date this Bill comes into operation, they will have to supplement the trust fund until it is sufficient to cover their liabilities.

The mines are therefore relieved of payments in respect of outstanding liability in terms of the existing Act, but as against that, they accept the recalculated outstanding liability. The difference, however, is that the present debt liability to be met on definite dates, whereas the payment of the recalculated liability can be stretched over the whole expected lifetime of the mine. Those mines which do not have sufficient funds in the trust fund to cover their liability can make their payments in smaller installments over a longer period, and in this way relief can be granted to certain mines.

The same recalculation of obligations will also be made in respect of Group B mines. The difference, however, is that most Group B mines have already fully met their outstanding liability under the existing Act. That is taken into account. Mines which still have liabilities, however, will still owe that money, so that viewed as a whole the position of the Group B mines will not be affected by the apportionment of the fund.

The recalculation of the obligations of the mines will of course result in a re-apportionment of those obligations, and that will remedy a further serious anomaly in the present set-up.

The basis envisaged for the re-apportionment of the re-calculated liabilities is a single factor, namely the shifts worked over a given period of, say, ten years. The tariff per shift will therefore be the same for all gold mines, and every mine will then be responsible for its fair share of the re-calculated debts. The shifting of obligations from one mine to another which can take place under the present system, and which in fact is also the basis for the legal provisions, then becomes impossible. This re-apportionment of obligations should afford considerable relief to the older marginal mines, and it is even possible that their lives may be prolonged to some extent as a result.

A change is made also in respect of the apportionment of current levies. At present the levies on the mines are apportioned on a basis which depends on factors which are not scientific and which once again have the effect of taxing the older mines more heavily than the never mines. These factors presuppose that the older mines cause more pneumoconiosis than the newer mines. There is, however, no accepted scientific grounds for such a supposition. It is known to science that whilst dust is the basic cause of pneumoconiosis, there are many other factors which play a role in the contraction and development of the disease. Some of these factors are, e.g., the composition of the dust, the density of concentration of dust, changes in temperature, air pressure, depth, the presence of harmful gases and the efficacy of the ventilation, etc. These factors can differ from mine to mine, and therefore from the scientific viewpoint it is wrong to accept that the danger of contracting pneumoconiosis is equally great in all mines, or that a particular mine is more dangerous simply because it is older than another.

A basic principle of insurance is that premiums are based on risk, and particularly is that so in the case of accident insurance. The employer with the highest accident risk pays the highest premium in respect of his employees. The Bill therefore provides for the application of this principle in connection with the apportionment of levies between the various mines. In order to determine the pneumoconiosis risk of each mine on a scientific basis, the Bill provides for the establishment of an expert technical committee and the apportionment of levies will take place on the basis of the risk that committee decides on in respect of each mine; i.e. the tariff per shift worked which the mine-owner has to pay as part of his levy will be determined by the pneumoconiosis risk determined for his mine, taking into consideration all the factors which can affect that risk. That will therefore encourage mine-owners to improve working conditions and to eliminate factors which are likely to increase the pneumoconiosis risk in their mine. The acceptance by the State in 1956 of certain obligations has made it possible to increase the pensions of beneficiaries who were already at that time receiving pensions. The increase in the fourth-stage pension for persons who are already in receipt of pensions, and the increase in the pensions for widows and the dependent children of deceased beneficiaries will, it is estimated, cost approximately R8,000,000, and it gives me pleasure to announce that the Government has again decided to shoulder this burden, thereby ensuring that all widows and orphans who are now in receipt of pensions, as well as all existing beneficiaries who are already receiving the present fourth-stage pension or may in future become entitled to it, will benefit from the increases granted by this Bill.

There are numerous improvements of a lesser nature which I cannot mention here fully. I want to give the assurance, however, that this Bill is the product of intensive research, study and investigation during the past six years. Ample provision is being made for further research and study within the framework of this legislation, and I want to give the assurance that adaptations will be made whenever and wherever they may be considered necessary. Fortunately that is a matter of administration and of judicious application. and such adaptations will not require amendments of the legislation.

In conclusion, I want to say that this Bill is being submitted as an agreed measure between my Department, the mining industry and the mining trade unions. Mr. Speaker, I move.

I would like to say at once that, knowing that the Minister is leaving, one can understand that there is a measure of urgency about the passing of this Bill, but I would like to say that I think it is most regrettable, notwithstanding that this is a measure agreed to between the Government and the workers concerned and the Chamber of Mines, that there has not been more adequate time to study the measure, which is one of very great importance. The Minister has just told us that it is an agreed measure, but I think you will agree that some of the unions concerned have not had an opportunity of seeing the Bill. They know that the details have been agreed upon, but they have not seen the way in which the agreement to which they have come have been expressed in the legislation. I hope that the Minister in those circumstances will appreciate that there is clearly a duty, not only on this side of the House but also on hon. members opposite, to study this legislation carefully. I am glad to say that the hon. members on this side of the House have had the opportunity to study it to some extent, and I would like to express my thanks to the Minister for making it possible for Professor Oosthuizen and some of the officials to be at the disposal of hon. members on this side of the House who have a great deal of experience of pneumoconiosis to make a careful study of the Bill. It has helped a great deal, but I do hope it will be possible on future occasions to come earlier with legislation of this kind. Here is one of the most vital pieces of legislation on the Statute Book, the sort of thing which I believe should go to a Select Committee and be the subject of evidence, to give all sides of the House the fullest opportunity of making certain that we are putting the right legislation on the Statute Book. But we appreciate the particular problems which exist at present and we believe that this is a good step forward and accordingly we do not wish to be unduly difficult about the matter.

I would like to say at once that the figures quoted by the hon. the Minister of the immense sums which have been paid out over the years in respect of miners’ phthisis or pneumoconiosis since the first legislation was put on the Statute Book, are most impressive. But I think the Minister would be the first to agree with me that even that compensation has by no means compensated those to whom we owe so much, the persons who have produced the wealth, who have done the job of digging out the gold in the mines, or the suffering they have had to bear throughout the years, and which has been shared by the members of their families. For them we have the utmost sympathy. It is a subject for great satisfaction to us all that there has been immense improvement in the conditions on the mines. Knowledge has been gained over the years, and the incidence and rapidity with which phthisis has advanced has been cut down enormously. That is all to the good, and no doubt with further research, and with the advantage we have of being one of the leading countries in the world in this respect, and with the benefit of the enormous strides which have been made in other countries, I hope it will be possible in the years to come to cut down even further the incidence of this dread disease, which is one of the most unpleasant occupational diseases from which one can suffer. Those of us who come from the Rand and who have friends among the people who have suffered realize just what that suffering means. As the Minister stated, this is a long road. It goes back to 1902, under Lord Milner, when the first steps were taken. There was an original Act and 17 amending Acts, and all parties have shared in the gradual advance in the efficacy of our legislation in this regard and the relief which it has been possible to grant to those suffering from this dread disease. I repeat that we all owe a great debt of gratitude to the miners who have taken this risk and who have played such a tremendous part in building up this country. At the same time I would like to pay a tribute also to the mine owners who have always been prepared to make available what was required, and tremendous sums of money have of course been provided, and we know that the money provided by the State has unquestionably been paid out of the funds which the State are paying from the mines. So really the whole of the payments made came from the mines.

I would like to say that this is a grand day for this side of the House. We have been pleading for some years now for the institution of an appeal board or a board of review of some kind. I think it is two years ago that the Minister’s predecessor promised that such a board would be instituted, and it is a source of the greatest satisfaction to those of us who have raised this matter with the Minister and his predecessors over the years. I know that our representations in this regard were very well received by the Minister’s immediate predecessor, but I would remind the Minister that on an occasion this matter was raised by the hon. member for Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher), who ever since he came to this House has constantly raised this matter of pneumoconiosis. As one who has had great experience of the medical side of pneumoconiosis, we all owe him a great debt of gratitude for having done that, but it was he who was told by the Minister’s predecessor before the last one that he did not know what he was talking about when he said it was necessary to have a board of review or an appeal board in some form or other. I am glad that this Minister has faced the position. I want to say that I am by no means convinced that the particular method which has been adopted will prove to be the best method. I realize fully the difficulties of putting one medical board there as a board of appeal from another medical board, but in the law we also have one set of Judges hearing appeals from another set of Judges. All I would say is that this board of review is very much welcomed. It will be watched with great interest, and it is hoped that it will solve the problem satisfactorily. Let us hope that that will be so, because obviously if it functions in this form it will satisfy everybody, particularly the medical profession who are concerned with the matter and who deal on the board itself with the matter of compensation, and the percentage of disability. We are now told that on the new basis which is proposed, and which we support—the hon. member for Rosetten-ville has been pleading for something like this for years—it will now be possible to assess the degree of disability to within 1 per cent. I would like to say that I wonder—it is only a thought but I believe it is something which we should bear in mind for the future—whether it is right that the first stage should be from 20 per cent to 50 per cent, the second stage from 50 per cent to 75 per cent, and the third over that figure. It means that the person who has 20 per cent disability is compensated to some extent, and one can understand that the work that man can do has not become less, nor has his earning capacity. But I believe we must not regard this as the final word on the matter. I believe that the bureau should watch very carefully indeed—and I am sure the unions will watch it—whether in fact the basis of division which is proposed for the future and which is incorporated in this Bill is the correct basis on which to work.

The other thing I would like to say here is that we all know that prevention is better than cure, and although immense strides have been made I know that neither the mines nor the unions will be prepared to leave it at that. Although I believe that we have reached very near to the ultimate in the gold mines, in respect of the newer fields in which there is pneumoconiosis, it is my belief that we have a long way to go before the preventive measures are as effectual as they are at present in the case of the gold mines. I believe that much research will be required there.

The Minister has referred to the fact that there is a completely new approach, and to the importance of the four clinical examinations. and the fact that compensation is to be based on the four factors mentioned by him. We will watch that with very close interest. I believe all will agree that it is right that the provisions of the law should be extended to those fields where in fact there has been pneumoconiosis in various forms, and which have not up to the present fallen within the purview of the law. I think the Minister will agree that there have undoubtedly been cases where miners have suffered great injustices in the past. I remember two years ago drawing the attention of this House to an investigation which had taken place and a paper which was presented by one who had made a close study of the matter and who suggested that there were grave injustices in regard to the particular stages allotted to people, and which indicated that a change was necessary. Let us hope that the steps now being taken will eliminate that.

I shall be glad if the hon. the Minister in his reply would say a little more in regard to the Bantu mine workers, because he referred to them very briefly. I could not gather why no change whatever is being made in their case. No doubt there is a good reason for it, but it would be of great interest to the House to know from the Minister why no change has been proposed there. From the few words expressed on the subject by the Minister, I could not understand what the reason was.

The financing of these measures has been very carefully considered, and I take it that when the Minister tells us that the Chamber of Mines is in full agreement with this measure that means there have been consultations in regard to all these technical details. Certainly we in this House are not qualified to judge of that, but if they are satisfied then obviously all sides of the House will be satisfied. I am very glad to hear from the Minister that some of the older mines will be relieved and that possibly in the case of some of the marginal mines this will extend their lives, but I wonder whether this is going far enough. It is my belief that it is of the utmost importance that the marginal mines on the Rand, and particularly on the East Rand, should be kept in production for as long as possible. It is quite clear that until considerable additional industrialization has taken place there must be an economic recession in those areas when some of these mines cease producing. I believe that his step the Government is taking is one in the right direction, but I wonder whether the time has not come that the Government could undertake some of the responsibility for keeping some of these mines in production for a longer period, because they are of course adding to the wealth of the country by remaining in production and producing additional gold which is of immense value to the country. I believe that while the steps now taken will provide some relief, I will be glad to know that the Government is doing everything possible to extend the lives of these marginal mines for as long as possible, and at least until such time as industrial development in the areas concerned will enable those areas to continue as prosperous parts of the country, notwithstanding the fact that those mines have gone out of production. We welcome this Bill and look forward to seeing it on the Statute Book, and I again express the hope that the Government will keep in the closest touch with the position and watch what, after all, is an experiment. I am quite sure the Bureau will watch it, and I hope there will be a full report to this House next year when the Minister’s Vote comes under discussion, or possibly even before that, as to whether the conclusion has been reached that this is the best solution for these problems. I would express the hope that when legislation of this sort is under consideration in future and is rushed, as this Bill is being rushed—and I say this whilst fully appreciating what the Minister has done to assist the Opposition—if we could have been made aware at an earlier stage that such legislation was under consideration, I think it would have been possible for all of us on all sides of the House to qualify ourselves very much better to discuss the Bill when it came along. I believe that could have been done. I say that, notwithstanding the fact that the Minister has been helpful in regard to the matter, for which I have already thanked him. The Minister can therefore rest assured that whilst we do not wish to see this Bill rushed through the House, we will help to ensure that it becomes part of our legislation this Session still.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. Tucker) for his very objective and realistic approach to this Bill. I fully agreed with him when he said that it was a very good step forward. There are certain other points on which I agree with him, and those points will become evident during the course of my speech. I congratulate the hon. member on this type of speech, in comparison with the speech he made here a few days ago. [Interjections.] Sir, the Minister has given us a very detailed analysis of this Bill and I wish to congratulate the Minister on the Bill. I am fully aware of the considerable part which his predecessor played in regard to this Bill, and I therefore wish to extend our appreciation to this Minister, as well as to his predecessor, for what they have done in this respect. On behalf of the mine workers and their dependants, I express my thanks and appreciation to the Minister as well. This is once more proof of the fact that this Government is always conscious of the importance of the mines and the mine workers and their families in the development of our country. This Bill is the result of hard work, constructive thought, wide and thorough research and intensive study, and this was done by the Minister, his Department and his advisers, and I wish to convey to him, too. our appreciation for what they have done. Allow me, Sir, to state that our mining industry is still playing, as in the past, a very important part in the economic life and structure of our country. No other industry in South Africa has done more to bring stability to our economy and to contribute so much towards making our Republic known in the outside world. Apart from being one of the most important sources of our national income, I think our gold mining industry is the largest single employer of White and non-White labour in this country. I want to remind hon. members that it is the employee who is responsible for keeping the industry going, and the fact that we have this Bill to-day is a matter of national importance—the fact that we want to protect the interests of those who contribute so much to the economic stability of our country. There are, of course, certain social and human considerations which must be taken into account. One of these is the fact that we cannot allow a wastage of manpower, especially skilled White man power. In the second place, we cannot allow a wastage of human lives; that is most important. Therefore I welcome the protection which this Bill intends to give to the mine worker. We have come a very long way since the days at the beginning of this century when gold mining was one of the most hazardous occupations in the world. Since then science, especially medical science and technology, have made tremendous progress and have made a considerable contribution towards reducing the hazards of gold mining. Dust, however, is still the most important hazard to which the gold miners are subjected, and it is necessary for us therefore to take the necessary legislative and other steps from time to time to protect the workers against this hazard, and to revise from time to time the arrangements which exist for the payment of compensation to those unfortunate mine workers who have succumbed to the effect of this hazard. The enactment in 1956 of the present Pneumoconiosis Act marked the beginning of a new era in fighting this disease. It also introduced a new era in our approach to this disease and in the question of compensation for this disease. This 1956 Act brought about considerable improvement and removed certain unsatisfactory features of the previous legislation. I am grateful, however, that this matter was not left there and that in the past six years, energetic efforts have resulted in this Bill, which brings about substantial improvements for our mine workers in general. What is most important—and I want to emphasize this—is the fact that this Bill puts into effect the latest scientific knowledge of pneumoconiosis, and secondly this Bill puts into effect the recommendations made by the Allen Commission of Inquiry, the Beyer’s Commission of Inquiry and of the Oosthuizen Departmental Committee of Inquiry. Sir, I am no scientist but I have full confidence in our scientists, and especially after having studied this Bill I have full confidence in the scientists who have advised the hon. the Minister. I am satisfied as a layman that this more scientific approach to this involved question of certification of pneumoconiosis and classification of disability, will benefit the mineworker and will do nothing else. I do not plead for compensation where compensation is not due. What I do plead for. however, is for compensation for the miner who has suffered irreparable harm to his health through the inhalation of dust. That is the miner who needs assistance. I therefore welcome this more objective and scientific method which this Bill provides for the determination of the degree of harm suffered by the miner. I have no doubt that impairment of the function of the respiratory system is primarily caused by this disease, and that from a legal point of view it is an infinitely better and more equitable basis on which to award compensation instead of the out-dated subjected concept of impairment of capacity for manual work, which is not only a secondary but often a delayed effect of the disease and of the primary damage. We all know that science is at man’s service, and if science can assist us to ensure a more just treatment for those who actually need assistance and, for the sake of justice, for those who risk their health in the service of their country, then this Bill must be welcomed. A considerable amount of public money is spent annually on pneumoconiosis research. The Government took the lead in 1956 to establish this pneumoconiosis research unit, and the Government would be failing in its duty if it did not put into effect the result of that research. I think it is a responsibility of the Government towards the public and towards the miners to make full use of the details and the knowledge gained through that research. I am pleased to be able to say that the Government has not neglected its duty in this respect and has taken the lead here once again.

This Bill provides for better medical control over workers in our mines, and for the first time the Pneumoconiosis Bureau will fulfil its duty as the guardian of the health of our mine workers. This is a very great improvement and I welcome it wholeheartedly. Although this Bill does not provide for basic and general increases—it makes no provision for that and I do not accept it as a basic aim of this Bill—certain substantial relief is given to those who most need relief. And who are they? The people who most need relief are those severely incapacitated miners, their widows and their dependants, and this new basis of certification will benefit the miners in general, so that a large number of our miners will be re-certified and re-classified into more advanced stages of disability. That is my firm belief and it was confirmed to me by the experts and the scientists. The fact that the Government has undertaken to bear the burden of the immediate increase in the pension of the existing beneficiaries is further proof of the Government’s sympathy for the victims of pneumoconiosis and their dependants. While I support this Bill I want to plead with the Minister to ensure that the law is applied sympathetically, with discretion and with equity. Sir, a good law can be rendered ineffective by bad administration and through lack of facilities. I have no doubt that the Minister will do everything in his power to ensure just administration. I want to plead with him to make adequate facilities available to the Bureau to fulfil its dutites in the best traditions of medical science for the benefit of those who need assistance. If that does not happen and if, the necessary facilities are not made available, it may lead to injustices. This Bill makes provision for research into the prevention of pneumoconiosis and for the treatment of persons suffering from that disease. Prevention, as we know, is better than cure. We know also that compensation is no remedy for an incurable disease. No person can be adequately compensated for permanent and irreparable loss of his health. The emphasis—and I repeat, the emphasis—should therefore be placed not on compensation but on prevention of the disease. We know that where there is no dust there can be no pneumoconiosis. Dust prevention and extraction have become more and more efficient in the course of the last few years, but in spite of that miners still contract pneumoconiosis. It is doubtful whether dust prevention will ever become so effective that pneumoconiosis will disappear completely from our mines. Other preventative measures will therefore have to be found, and every possibility should be thoroughly investigated. One such possibility, as the scientists and experts tell me, appears to be the use of aluminium therapy. It appears that in animal experimentation its value as a deterrent has been proved, but that sufficient controlled experiments, as far as human beings are concerned, have not been completed and carried out. This was used in Canada and in Australia for some time, I am informed. I know, however, that for such tests we have better facilities in this country than anywhere else in the world, and I appeal to the Minister to have this matter thoroughly investigated and studied. If there is a slight possibility that the development of pneumoconiosis can be prevented in the early stages or that it can be delayed to some extent or that the process of incapcitation can be delayed, then the miners are entitled to a thorough investigation of this matter.

Finally, there is the question of the treatment of miners suffering from pneumoconiosis. One is aware of the fact that pneumoconiosis is regarded as an incurable disease. Medical science has not yet found a cure for it. It appears also that there is not much hope that a cure will ever be found. It is known, however, that certain complicating conditions can be treated and that at least some relief can be given to the pneumoconiosis sufferer by adequate treatment of those complications. Responsibility towards the miner does not end with the award of compensation. The object should be to assist the miner to remain in his job as long as possible. Compensation can never compensate a miner for the irreparable loss of his health and his livelihood. It is a fact that some miners who are known to me spend a considerable part of their pensions on medical care and medical treatment. I therefore plead with the Minister to establish some organized scheme for the treatment of persons suffering from pneumoconiosis, and I do hope that the Minister will make use of the powers given to him in this Bill to establish such an organization for the treatment of persons suffering from this serious and this historical disease.

There is nothing that I can quarrel with in the speech which has just been delivered by the hon. member for Ventersdorp (Mr. Greyling), and I am very pleased to say that he is at last seeing this disease as we have been seeing it for many years. The importance of this measure before the House can best be demonstrated by putting it in its correct perspective. We must look upon this disease as following upon the employment of approximately 50,000 White people on our mines and 300,000 Bantu. These are the people who work on the surface and go underground and extract from the bowels of the earth 17,000,000 to 18,000,000 ounces of gold a year valued at R500,000,000 per annum, apart from the coal and the other minerals which are brought to the surface by others employed in the mining industry. The hon. the Minister of Mines knows better than I do how important this industry is to our economy. We are told in the Year Book that South Africa’s greatest source of foreign exchange and its principal attraction for overseas investors are our gold mines and our mining industry as a whole. The mining industry has raised …346,000,000, and out of its profits it has contributed a further …124,000,000, making a total during the years of …470,000,000. That is the amount of money that is coming into our country through our gold-mining industry. I am very tempted, Sir, to quote to you from Hansard this evening what the hon. the Minister of Mines said to me in 1958 when I dared to bring up this subject of pneumoconiosis. I am very tempted to read out what the hon. member for Krugersdorp said to me, but seeing that he is here and the then Minister of Mines is not here, I think I should quote just one small extract. When I spoke about the necessity for some sort of appeal, which was the least of the important matters that I dealt with at the time, this is what the hon. member said in referring to me—

That was true then.

I just read that out to show that for political reason very often members on both sides of the House but more so on that side say things for wish they are not altogether responsible and which they have to swallow very bitterly later on. I think Hansard is one of the most dangerous documents that we have here from the point of view of those hon. members. I am not going to quote any further, but if I were to quote what members said to me particularly, when I dealt with pneumoconiosis, it would be more laughable to-day than it was when I raised this matter.

What a nice spirit!

The hon. the Minister at that time was most annoyed with me because I had dared to disagree with his findings. He was so enamoured with his Act at the time, that he said that it was a model Act for the world to use and that there was no room for improvement in it. I think that was the sentiment that he expressed. Sir, I do want to take this opportunity, however now, of saying that I have no words to express adequately the admiration that I have for those people behind the scenes who have done so much in the past six years in preparing this measure. I think all of us and particularly the mine workers and the controllers of mines and the investors in the mining industry should be very grateful to those people, because to my mind this Bill does two things. In the first place it protects the individual who works in the mines, and it protects the individual who invests his money in mining ventures. That is the first group of people to receive protection. Secondly, protection is given to the industry as a whole. As I have said, our whole economy is based on the mining industry in this country, the gold-mining industry in particular. But apart from the gold-mining industry there are the copper mines, the diamond mines; there is our uranium and then we have 101 base metals in this wonderful country of ours. I shudder to think what the country would be like if we did not have the mining industry to fall back on. Sir, we talk about the great citrus industry. Think of the amount of work that is required to produce the oranges which are sold overseas; think of the amount of work that is put in to produce our wool clip, and yet these two industries produce a mere fraction of the foreign exchange that is produced by our gold-mining industry and our diamond mines. In spite of that fact, we find that when the Mines Vote is under discussion there are very few members who take sufficient interest in the mine worker to attend the debate. I have said that before; I repeat it to-day and I will keep on saying it until I find that this House is filled to capacity when we talk about mining matters, because we should do everything in our power in this house to keep our mining industry going. We have to build our whole economy, our whole life around these industries, and if we let them go, then everything else will go with them. It is no good producing wool, it is no good producing oranges and it is no good have a great fishing industry if we let our mining industry go by the board. The more I read about our mining industry, the more I realize how much the other sectors of our economy are dependent on our minding industry. Think of the secondary industries which flow from the mining industry; think of the food that is used by these people; think of the towns which have been built around the mines; think of the progress that has been made in the Free State, for instance, since 1934 when gold was first found at Odendaalsrus. The whole structure of our country is changing to-day. Great masses of people are moving from one area to another because of the discovery of gold etc., in our country. If around every mine that is discovered, towns like Johannesburg, Germiston, Brakpan, Benoni and the other towns of the Reef can be built and established, then we will be safe here for all times. We have a wonderful future ahead of us. God has been good to us here, because no sooner do we find one mine falling by the wayside, than another richer, better and bigger mine is discovered. I do not know where it all comes from but thank God that it is so. I say that those people who take an interest in the men who extract this wealth from the bowels of the earth must be given every opportunity to continue the great work that they are doing, and I sincerely hope that our present Minister of Mines will remain Minister of Mines for as long as his party remains in power. I do not want to see another change of Minister next year again; that has been happening too frequently in the past. My plea is that while the Minister occupies that portfolio he should encourage as much research work as possible, not only on the person who contracts pneumoconiosis, but also on the healthy person. Ways and means must be found of discovering the catalyst that we have somewhere that produces pneumoconiosis in various stages in one group of people, while not affecting other groups working under the same or different conditions. I also want to say to the hon. the Minister in dealing with this question of research that he must not depend entirely on the C.S.I.R. to do this work. We should make full use for research purposes of universities that we have throughout the country on the Witwatersrand, in the Free State, in the Cape and in Natal. In Natal there are the coal mines; the Natal University should establish a research unit at the university to undertake research into coal; at the Witwatersrand University research can be conducted not only into coal but into the other metals that we find in the Transvaal. We should investigate the effect of copper and asbestos on the body. Why should asbestos cause carcinoma of the lung, for instance? How quickly does it develop? Does it affect people in surrounding areas? That is the sort of thing that I would like to see the University of the Witwatersrand tackle as soon as possible in their Medical School and in the Engineering Department.

Just before the dinner break, I was saying a few words about the value of research and the importance of research in the matter of pneumoconiosis, and I want to read one small paragraph from the report of the Pneumoconiosis Conference which took place, as the hon. Minister knows, in 1959, a paragraph which I am sure his advisors have taken note of—

That is of paramount importance. It means that although we bring in a Bill here to-day which appears on the face of it a suitable means of dealing with pneumoconiosis, we must make up our minds here and now that this is not the last word. It is only the beginning of a process which in the end will benefit the mine workers, benefit them to such an extent that I believe that if we carry on along these lines of research, in ten years time, mining will no longer be a hazardous occupation. But we have to provide all the facilities which we can give to the research workers. My own feeling is that in the field of pneumoconiosis we have not got enough people to do the work. You see, it is a specialized field and the best of our people to-day are spending their time in the bureau examining the patients and they have about 50,000 White people and some 30,000 Bantu to deal with. I don’t say that the people in the Bureau have to deal with 300,000 Bantu at one time, but they have to deal with them eventually. So those people have all their time taken up with examination work and have not got the time to do the necessary research work. You cannot expect the few people in the C.S.I.R. to-day to undertake that work. That is why I suggest that it is essential for us to get as many of our universities and medical schools as possible, interested in that type of research. On the Witwatersrand they could busy themselves with research in respect of the coal-mining industry and the gold-mining industry, in Natal also with the coal mines, perhaps in the Cape in respect with some of the base metals like copper, manganese and so forth, and in Pretoria I think they could busy themselves immediately, especially in view of the fact that they have taken the interest they have in dealing with carcinoma—they have got the use of the cobalt bomb and so forth—to see what relationship there is between carcinoma of the lung due to asbestos and pneumoconiosis and how the two interlink with one another. Those are two very important suggestions. We have been very fortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the overseas research workers have been so ready to give us the benefit of their work, but remember that we are the greatest gold producer in the world and it is up to us therefore to show the way to the other countries.

I am certain that if America for instance had produced as much gold as we have, they would be in the forefront of research work, and although the gold-mining industry year after year puts thousands and thousands of pounds back into their efforts to promote education as a whole, it is in this particular field that we must look for men, good men, to concentrate on research work in respect of the various types of mining activities that go on in our country. I do not want to go further into that because time is getting short, and because I want to deal with what I consider to be four of the main aspects of the Bill as we have it before us and which I think are to some extent at least the result of some of the criticisms we have put up from this side since 1958.

Firstly, I am of course pleased that the capacity for work to-day is of secondary consideration; not that it is not important, but it takes its place behind the more scientific and more accurate assessment which we can now arrive at from the cardio-respiratory examinations. X-rays in themselves are also not sufficient either. We have got to remember this, that when a man comes up to be examined, he has got to be treated as a patient who will be examined by a specialist to see whether he is fit to become a miner, fit to have a certificate. We have to have precise X-rays. X-raying is not easy. It is not a matter of taking a picture and looking at it and to determine from one picture what is wrong with the patient. We have to have experts in the field of radiology. Then we want a clinical examination of the patient who comes up. I say “the patient”, because when he walks into that room, he must be treated as a patient will be treated in a doctor’s consulting room. A complete clinical picture must be built around that man. We must see whether his build, his structure, his psychological outlook, his weight and his height, and all other allied things must be taken into consideration, to see if he is fit for employment to become a miner. He will have to work for years as a miner and because of the precautions which should be taken now, his years of work become longer and longer. It is no longer employment which starts say in 1950, and ends in 1955; it goes on and those of us who deal with mine workers know that you have people in the mines now who have been working there for 35 and 40 years. They are already working as long as that. Men of 60 say “I am quite fit, I don’t want to retire; I am working, I am earning a nice living, let me stay on;”. They go for their periodical examination, and they are still well and fit. They are very proud, as a matter of fact of being able to continue. Those are the people from whom you want to find out why they have been able to resist pneumoconiosis,—the living person working under the same condition as miners; why is he able to resist pneumoconiosis.

I go on now to the next point which I think is very important and that is the division of stages. To-day we have given up the previous method of distinction into various stages. There will no longer be four stages, but three stages. We on this side all stood for that. My difficulty now was briefly expressed by the hon. member for Germiston (District) (Mr. Tucker). When we say that a man is suffering from pneumoconiosis in the first stage, i.e. 20 per cent to 50 per cent, then I picture it—I may be wrong—that at this level of disability he is half a man from a working capacity point of view and that he is only able to do 50 per cent of his work. When he gets to the third stage, or when he reaches the 75 per cent stage—one imagines that 75 per cent of his lung tissue is not working normally and he is only able to do then 25 per cent of his normal work. That is how I picture it. I may be wrong. It may not be the scientific way of looking at it, but when I look at it that way, I think it is not fair to group the 20 per cent disability with the 50 per cent. I think here I would like the hon. the Minister, when he has had time to consider the matter with his advisors, whether it would not be better to go from 20 per cent to 40 per cent, from 40 to 65 and then the final stage 65 and over. What life can a man have left if he is put in the third stage with a 75 per cent disability? With a 75 per cent disability there is not much left for him in life. You can give him very, very high benefits when he is in the third stage. You can be very generous with your benefits, because I can tell you that he won’t enjoy those benefits very long. So I say: Rather let him live longer and let him enjoy the benefits that you are going to give him. Because the way I see it, the whole plan is that something more should be given to the miner, but I think we are not giving sufficient in the third stage. And I am not talking in terms of money now, but in terms of years of life, and when I talk about years of life, I say: Give him what is due to him financially, but let him enjoy it for a longer period than he will if you proceed in what you are doing here. It should not be necessary for me or my colleagues here to move an amendment at this stage, because I said right at the beginning that I think this is a good Bill because it allows flexibility, it allows for alteration after a short period; there is nothing rigid about it. When the Minister said that it is a step in the right direction, he was right, and I hope he will keep moving in the right direction. If I thought for a moment that it was bad, I would have no hesitation in saying so and condemning it lock, stock and barrel, but I can see here ways and means of improving the position, and one suggestion I make now in favour of the mine worker is to stop at 65 per cent, and let him come up from there and retire if necessary.

The next point I want to make I think I must clarify, because listening to one or two people, I am sure that the appeal board, has not been clearly explained. I just want to say briefly that the way I read it here, the position is that this appeal board which will come into operation as a reviewing board, as it is called in the Bill, comes into operation when the certifying committee has given a decision which is not accepted by the miner. He does not like the decision because his private doctor from whom he asked advice told him differently and he then wants his case reviewed. But instead of what we thought previously was a very good idea of having an independent body reviewing his case, now we have the position that the doctors who examined the case on the one side plus the certifying committee sitting together, when there is disagreement, as representatives of each body, and they decide whether this man is or is not entitled to something which he thinks he is entitled to. It is not an outside group of people that come in and pass judgment on the doctors’ decisions that have been made. Those people that make decisions, will be able to rectify their own mistakes if it should be felt necessary to do so. I think that will work. I have got the most utmost faith in the medical personnel of the bureau, and I know that they will give a fair review of the decisions they came to earlier on.

The next point that I want to emphasize is that I would like the Director of the Mines Medical Bureau, I think it is going to be called that, to bear in mind that when the doctors come there to examine the miners he must forget that he is bound by laws. We find here that he may not be a doctor, and therefore this is a point I want him to bear in mind, and I am quite sure that the medical advisers to the hon. Minister agree with me. He must forget about the rigidity that hampers him according to law. Let the man go in and be examined by these people as if, as I said earlier on, he is to be examined by a specialist, and if there are difficulties, legal difficulties or regulation difficulties, we will sort them out later, but let there be a clear understanding that these people are being examined to see whether they are fit and able to work, or secondly, whether any condition has arisen in their body to prevent them from continuing with the work they are doing, and let us forget about this rigidity and inability to do this or to do that because the law says this or the law says that.

I come to the next point. I am pleased to hear that at long last there is going to be some liaison between the panel doctors who look after the patients and the bureau itself. I cannot stress the desirability of this too strongly. If the hon. the Minister wants to have a contented group of people, I say that he can best achieve that by making those people who are being examined feel that they are human beings and that they are not just numbers. One of the things that they detest is that when they go down for examination, and when they present their cards, their names are of secondary importance. The bureau numbers are taken and everything goes by numbers, and the doctors will know much more about No. 19760 than about Mr. Diederichs.

The next thing is that as soon as a finding is made, a confidential report (confidential if necessary), should be forewarded to his private doctor especially if it is thought inadvisable to tell the patient what is wrong with him. In these enlightened days I am inclined to say that if a thing is wrong with a patient, let him know; but if necessary a confidential report should be given to the doctor who attends to him, and that doctor will look after him. The doctor who has sent the patient should know what is wrong, if there is anything wrong when he comes back to him from a special examination. It should not be kept a secret from us. I hope that that will be a thing of the past.

Are you now talking of private practitioners?

The private practitioner in this case is a contract doctor. He works for the Mines Benefit Society on contract and the Mines Benefit Societies’ Doctors look after all the patients on the mines, whether they work underground or on the surface, and they are treated, I hope, as private patients. The doctor is a panel doctor.

I am also pleased that the hon. the Minister has set aside, or will set aside, moneys for the teaching of a second trade or to guide a man when he goes to the second stage of phthisis into some trade, or occupation. I think that is very important, but to do that, you must make sure that you have sufficient public relations officers who will be able at all times to place these people who are going to leave the mines with small pensions into some other industry, or into commerce or wherever it is to be. A series of well-informed public relations officers will have to be instituted. That is terribly important. Today those mines which have public relations officers are much more concerned to see what happens between the man’s home life and his working life, but there has to be this connection outside the mines as well. We must set up as it were an employment agency for those people who wish to leave the mines.

Now when you have made those provisions and you have got the stages fixed and you have decided to give the worker the pension that is due to him, I must say that I think the hon. the Minister has perhaps been a little bit too careful in giving the money. I know you will always get that. None of us will ever be satisfied with what somebody else is giving. We always say: Give more, give more. But when we take into consideration that the lump sum of R960 is not going to be given to the individual in the first stage but that the money is going to be spread over a period of years, you are giving him very little more than before. It means that for the first four or five years he gets no increase in pension at all. All that you do is that you take this lump sum and you are dividing it up and giving it to him in monthly instalments. So the man in the first stage virtually gets no benefit from this new scheme at all. He only starts to derive benefits at the rate of about R10 a month after he reaches the second stage. I hope that later on we will discuss this matter again and see whether we cannot get a better allocation of money to these people.

I want to tell the hon. the Minister that one of the reasons why I think there has been a slight increase in the curve of pneumoconiosis, is the fact that a lot of mines are allowing their workers to do too much overtime. These fellows look for work because it is only by getting overtime money that they can come out. Ordinary time plus overtime enables them to make a decent living, and I think that too many miners to-day are doing overtime for the sake of getting the money, but are impairing their health. I feel that we should try to give them as much as we possibly can, but I think the time has come now where if a man is going to be asked to do a double shift (and that is a very common thing) he should come up to the surface for a couple of hours before going in for the second shift. He must come into the fresh air. Give him three or four hours fresh air before he starts his second shift. Some people who don’t know about the position, may say: What does it matter, he gets double pay, he wants to do that work. But we who know, know that he is impairing his health in many cases and I think that in most cases where people are taking these long shifts, they must be made to come to the surface for a period of three or four hours before they continue onto the second shift.

Just to wind up before I sit down, I have left one point to the last, but that point will be dealt with more fully with by the hon. member for Durban (Central) (Dr. Radford).I think the Director will have to consider very carefully, especially if he is a non-medical man, what orders he is giving to the doctors, not only those who work with him, but according to the Act he can direct a doctor anywhere to do certain things; he can order a doctor in the country to do a post mortem; he can order that doctor not only to do the post mortem, but to give his findings. And what amazes me most in this Bill, and I think it is terribly wrong, is that he will be paid for his services if he does the work to the satisfaction of the Director. He may carry out the wishes of the Director, but if the Director does not think he has done it properly, he need not pay him. I think that is one of the things that will be elaborated upon by my colleague, and I hope we can get that little matter straightened out. The other minor matters I think we can deal with at a later stage, but I do wish to say to the hon. the Minister that I hope that this Bill he has brought in here, will serve the purpose for which it was introduced and that the mine workers, who have done so much for us, will enjoy the benefits which they so richly deserve.

The hon. member has said a great many things with which I agree and with which the whole House will probably agree, inter alia, that much more research should be done in connection with this subject and that we should never cease doing research work into this question of miner’s phthisis. I think the whole House will agree with him that the time of the Bureau is so limited that those who are employed there will not have the time to do that research work and that others should be placed at its disposal to do that work. Another important point on which I agree with him is that the mine worker should be given something while he is still alive. Everybody would like to have a fine and a beautiful funeral but everybody would prefer to have something while they are alive. These are basic matters in respect of which I feel the same way as the hon. member does.

Before I deal with the contents of the Bill I should like to say something in connection with the problem of pneumoconiosis as such. As far as good miner’s phthisis legislation is concerned, there are three basic facts which you have to bear in mind, Sir. The first one—and this is fundamental—is the one to which the hon. member has also referred, namely that the object of the measure should be to lengthen the life of the mine worker. That to my mind is the main and most important requirement when we talk about progress. Positive steps should be taken to lengthen the life of the mine worker. The second basic requirement is that his family should be reasonably provided for when the husband is no longer in a position to work in the mine and to earn a salary. That too is a very basic requirement when we talk about progress in connection with our miner’s phthisis legislation. The third requirement follows logically on to the first, and is that the levy which the mines have to pay to augment the fund from which compensation is paid, must serve as a measure to force mine owners and mine managers to take every possible step to prevent miner’s phthisis. Those are the three things which you must look for in any miner’s phthisis legislation.

As far as the first point is concerned, it is essential that this House take note of the other essential factors when we talk about the fate of the mine worker. It is this, that a considerable number, yes, most of those people who report to the Bureau for examination and approval to work in the mine, are rejected. The examination was already so thorough in 1935 that only 35 per cent of the men who applied to the Bureau to become mine workers were approved. You can well understand, Sir, that the person who goes to the Bureau to apply for work regards himself as a healthy person. However, of those selected persons only 35 per cent pass the examination to which the Bureau subjects them before they can become mine workers. I cannot over-emphasize the fact that we are dealing with the cream of South Africa. The person who is issued with a ticket to go to work underground has to be an A-1 Springbok type of person, otherwise he is not passed out and that is the person who ultimately turns into a hopeless miner’s phthisis sufferer. It is very gratifying to note that conditions, working conditions in the mines are being improved. We have been hearing that for years and we want to encourage that; yet it remains an unpleasant fact, and it is necessary that this House realizes it, that up to the present not a single person has spent his whole life underground without contracting miner’s phthisis. It is necessary for this House to know that. Those people who ultimately become miner’s phthisis sufferers deserve all our attention. We should consider what effect it has on the health of our people in general that such a large portion of the cream of our nation turn into miner’s phthisis sufferers. As far as I know this is something which has never as yet been investigated. That is also something of which this House should take note. I repeat that the detrimental effects of pneumoconiosis or silicosis and tuberculosis on the rest of the nation and on the national health as such have never as yet been investigated. That aspect has never been investigated. That as far as the background of the whole problem is concerned.

I now come to the provisions contained in this Bill. I first wish to deal with the scales of compensation. When we talk about being liberal or extravagant in respect of compensation, it is necessary to make a comparison. I cannot claim to be a strong or handsome man unless I compare myself with one of you. We must make a comparison. Let us consider the pension scales which are paid to the people to-day and those which will apply under the new legislation and then compare them with the other pensions which are paid in South Africa. We can then see to what extent they conform to point No. 2 which I have made; we should apply a little test.

In terms of the existing Act a miner’s phthisis sufferer received R24 in the old second stage, his wife R6 and his child R3. In terms of the new Bill the husband will receive R24 in the stage comparable to the former second stage under the old set-up, although it is no longer called the second stage, the wife R6 and the child R3. It, therefore, remains exactly the same. What is the position in respect of the old third stage, that is to say the group between 50 per cent and 75 per cent. At the present moment the husband receives R36, the wife R12 and the child R6, whereas only the benefits in the case of the husband are being increased to R46 under this Bill. Let us compare these pension benefits with those of a railwayman.

You cannot compare the two—they are not comparable.

The hon. member must give me a chance; I haven’t much time. When we make the comparison between the pension benefits of the mine worker suffering from miner’s phthisis and those received by a railwayman we must remember that in the first-mentioned case the pension is being paid to a person who has already contracted miner’s phthisis and who is, therefore, already a sick person whereas in the last-mentioned case the pension is being paid to a healthy man. What do we find on making such a comparison? I have already given you the scales relating to mine workers, Sir. As far as the railwayman is concerned, a second-grade clerk with 25 years of service receives R551 per annum plus a gratuity of R1,826 whereas the miner’s phthisis sufferer receives no gratuity. Not only is the pension of the railwayman to whom I have referred higher than that of the miner’s phthisis sufferer, but he receives a gratuity in addition. And he is a healthy man! If this clerk to whom I have referred has had 35 years of service he will receive a pension of R60 per month and a gratuity of R2,559.

How much did he contribute?

He has made a contribution to the gratuity, but not to the pension.

What about the Provident Fund of the mine workers?

That fund has nothing to do with the compensation paid for miner’s phthisis. The less we talk about the pension of the mine worker ex the Provident Fund the better. But the hon. member should give me an opportunity of going on with my speech because I have not much time. As I have said we should compare the pension payable to miner’s phthisis sufferers with something in order to come to a just decision. I have compared it with the pension benefits payable to a railwayman and that leads you to conclude, Sir, that the mine worker who is already a sick man, receives less than the particular railwayman whom I have taken as an example and who—you must not lose sight of this fact—is still a healthy man. In other words, the miner’s phthisis sufferer receives no compensation, therefore, for the fact that he was a sick man when he ceased to work.

Let me examine the position in respect of the fourth stage. At the moment that miner’s phthisis sufferer receives R50, his wife R13 and his child R9. This scale is being raised in this Bill to R73 in the case of the husband, R13 in the case of the wife whereas the child’s allowance remains the same. We welcome these increases. It has already been pointed out, however, that provision should not only be made for these people so that they can have a decent funeral, because we should not lose sight of the fact that once a man has reached the fourth stage, he has not much longer to live. I want the House to realize this fact. When we make such an analysis as the one which I have just made. I think there is much to be said for it that this whole question should again be revised one day.

This is an agreed measure, in other words, the parties concerned, namely the Chamber of Mines and the mine workers have agreed to this. With a view to that it is no good even thinking of moving amendments in the Committee Stage. That is excluded because we have been asked to accept the Bill as it stands at the moment, to accept it as a measure in respect of which the parties concerned have agreed. In this connection I wish to point out that the words “agreed measure” have their origin in the thirties and that since then we have often had a repetition of them. It is not my intention to try to say anything about the integrity of any of the parties. I suppose they did their best to ease the task of this House. When you look at Clauses 41 and 42 of the Bill. Sir, you will notice that the Department of Health and the Department of Bantu Administration are in the foreground and that certain compensations have to be paid to mine workers who receive treatment after they have contracted the disease. We notice that the Department of Health treats a Bantu who has contracted the disease in the mining industry, and thereafter hands him over to the Department of Bantu Administration which is then responsible for his future maintenance. Ultimately he finds himself in the hands of the police and he is returned to the place where he originally came from. I would be failing in my duty if I did not bring this matter to the notice of the House. We are not dealing therefore with the Chamber of Mines and the mine workers’ union alone, but also with three Government departments. It is now provided by law that a person can be deprived of his service certificate for reasons other than miner’s phthisis. It is all very well for us to say that he should be taken out of the mine in his own interests but who becomes responsible for him in that case? In that case he becomes the responsibility of the Department of Labour and of the Department of Social Welfare. Hon. members surely do not expect us simply to forget about this man. It must be remembered that this person is still a young person who has only been working in the mine for a few years and who was disqualified from working underground when he went for his first examination because he had contracted other ailments there. In that case he is placed at the doorstep of the Department of Social Welfare and the Department of Labour.

I hope that when it does happen again that we have to discuss a matter such as this in this House we will have the benefit of a thorough investigation. All these bodies which I have mentioned, such as the Department of Health for example, should also be consulted and should not simply be saddled with a person who has already contracted miner’s phthisis. All these bodies should be given an opportunity of making their contributions to the solution of the problem. I wish to emphasize that in the first place there should be a far-reaching investigation by a competent commission and that for the purposes of this investigation they should have the benefit of the opinion of all the medical men in the country so that we can get away from canalized medical evidence because there are also many diverse opinions in the medical field. That alone is sufficient reason to have the matter thoroughly investigated. The questions which such a commission will have to investigate will be, firstly, the effect of miner’s phthisis on the national health in general, secondly; the extent of the poverty and misery among miner’s phthisis sufferers and their dependants; and thirdly, what can still be done to prevent miner’s phthisis. These three basic factors should be thoroughly investigated so that when we are again confronted with a Bill in this connection in this House, the House will be able to accept that the Bill is the result of a far-reaching investigation into all the aspects of miner’s phthisis. After that the measures should be subjected to the test of a Select Committee. An agreed measure will be acceptable once it has been subjected to the scrutiny of a Select Committee where people with knowledge of the disease and people with knowledge of social welfare work will be able to air their views authoritatively. It is along this road that this problem should be tackled. It has long since become a matter which cannot be solved by the two interested bodies alone, but it is a problem with national repercussions, particularly in the field of national health. Consequently the matter cannot be left to two bodies alone and I want to express the hope that we will not again be confronted with a Bill which has only been discussed by these two bodies. Every medical man in South Africa, and everybody who thinks that he can make a contribution to the solution of the problem must be given an opportunity of making that contribution. We will then be able to see whether the pension benefits as set out in this Bill can be justified by this House, particularly in view of the fact that the mining industry can no longer plead poverty to-day but that it is an industry which is enjoying liberal concessions from the Government to-day and an industry which enjoys many more benefits than any other industry. We all want to see this industry flourish but that should not happen at the expense of the general national health of South Africa. Hon. members must not tell me that the incidence of miner’s phthisis does not have a deleterious effect on our national health in general. Nobody dare allege that. It is, therefore, the duty of the Government to tackle this matter at a much higher level than it has done in the past—during the past 15 years.

As I have already said we will not be able to change this Bill now because it is a measure agreed upon by the Chamber of Mines and the mine workers. I am convinced, however, that there will still be complaints. That is why I trust that when we again have to deal with such a measure in this House, we will be able to accept it that there has been a thorough prior investigation by a competent commission and by a Select Committee of this House. I have said my say.

Mr. Speaker, I think it has been generally accepted that this Bill has a lot of merit as far as the legal, medical and technical aspects of the mining industry are concerned. But here I stop. It will be observed that I have not included the financial aspect amongst the considerations in respect of which this Bill gives satisfaction. It has been said that this is an agreed measure, but although that may be so, I think it should be known that the underground miners are not altogether happy with this Bill. To link up with this, I want to point out that we in this House have not been given sufficient opportunities to consult the miners concerned because of the short time available to us to study this Bill. To-day is only the sixth day since this Bill was made available to us, and to study a complicated Bill of this nature, comprising 107 pages of a technical, medical and financial nature, is asking too much of a layman.

I should also like to point out that at no stage did the various organizations concerned meet round a table with the purpose of deciding finally on the provisions of this Bill. What was done, was done on a unilateral basis and through intermediaries. Representatives of the Mine Workers’ Union, of the Mining Union Joint Committees, and of the Underground Officials’ Association have not yet jointly met the representatives of the mining industry at a Round Table conference for the purpose of ironing out the final provisions of the Bill. As I said, this was done on a unilateral basis which, we all know, is not the best way for drawing up satisfactory industrial legislation. It is well-known that the dangers of pneumoconiosis are not as great to-day as in days gone by. In this connection, I think we will all agree that the facilities which the mining industry has made available to miners have helped considerably towards the reduction of the incidence of pneumoconiosis and tuberculosis. A tribute must be paid to the mining industry for what it has done in this regard. Time alone will tell whether this Bill will bring such big improvements as are expected from it. It will be conceded, however, that a more scientific approach is now being made, in so far as the medical aspect of the disease is concerned, in the detection of pneumoconiosis through the cardiac-respiratory tests, and I think time will show that miners will get the benefits of better, if not earlier, certification.

All of us, I think, would like to see a miner being removed from underground working as soon as the first signs of pneumoconiosis are detected in his system. In saying this I do, however, realize the practical and financial problems attendant upon this suggestion, both to the miner and the industry. It would, of course, be the ideal thing if we could take a miner away from underground as soon as he shows signs of pneumoconiosis, thereby ultimately saving manpower and lengthening the lives of miners. I hope the day will come when we shall be able to do that, without financial loss to the miner. Then we shall indeed have rendered this very fine band of workers an excellent service.

When I made reference to the need for a Round Table discussion in regard to this matter, I should have taken it one stage further. This is, that the hon. the Minister should be asked whether he will not consider an arrangement in terms of which a non-medical representative of the miners will sit on the Certifying Committee consisting of medical men. When I suggest this for the mine workers, I think the same privilege should be extended to the mine owners, i.e. they too should be represented by a non-medical man on that committee. My reasons for making this suggestion are these. It is well-known amongst those of us who have regular contact with miners, that they always have the suspicion when coming up for a medical examination by a certifying committee, that the dice may be loaded against them, and consequently they may not get a fair test. I have no reason to believe that sort of suspicion is justified, but human nature being what it is, it is there nevertheless. Therefore, I feel that if there are two non-medical men sitting on this certifying committee and representing the interests of the miners and the mining industry, the psychological prejudice, which is in the mind of a miner when he is called for an examination, can be overcome and the more healthy state of affairs established. This can be brought about by a slight amendment to Clause 7 of his Bill, to the effect that the number of men serving on the certifying committee be increased from six to eight—the two additional men being the non-medical representatives to whom I have referred. I hope the hon. the Minister will see his way clear to accept this suggestion for the reasons I have mentioned.

Speaking about representation, I should like to have an assurance from the hon. the Minister that the Underground Officials’ Association will get representation on the Pneumoconiosis General Council to be established under Clause 48. Such an assurance was, I believe, given to the Underground Officials’ Association but there is no reference to it in this Bill. This association is playing a vital and active role in the mining industry, and as its members are working in a dusty atmosphere as well, it, too, should be represented on the Pneumoconiosis General Council. Is the hon. the Minister prepared to extend to this body such representation?

I have already referred to the fact that, in my opinion, this Bill does not, from a financial point of view make adequate provision in so far as compensation and pension benefits to the miners are concerned. I was surprised to hear from the hon. member for Ventersdorp (Mr. Greyling) that “that basic purpose of this Bill was not its financial aspect in so far as increased pensions were concerned”. I have to cross swords with him immediately on this score. Compare that statement with what was said by the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. M. J. van den Berg) who certainly should know what he is talking about when he talks about miners, namely that “no person working on the mines has lived out a normal lifetime”. In the light of this statement, the statement made by the hon. member for Ventersdorp cannot bear examination, and, if the hon. member for Krugersdorp is correct, then the financial aspect must always play an important part.

Now, when one examines the financial aspect of the Bill, what do we find? Firstly, we find that the lump sum payment of R960 has been abolished, and has been incorporated in an augmented pension in respect of the last two stages. Looking at the pension for the last two stages, however, it will be noticed that the pension for persons who are incapacitated to an extent of from 50 to 75 per cent, is increased by only R10 per month, or R120 per annum. This means that it will take the pensioner concerned, eight years to get an amount as extra pension to equal the lump sum payment that he is now forfeiting. In other words, it means that only after the lapse of eight years will he be starting to get an increased pension. As far as I am concerned, this increased pension does not constitute any concession at all. As I previously said, he will have to wait eight years before he will have got back that which he lost as a lump sum payment. In addition, he will be losing the interest on that sum of R960—amounting to roughly R560 over a period of eight years. I do not think it is fair to expect a miner to be satisfied with this new basis of compensation.

When we examine the position which is going to apply in respect of miners who are incapacitated to an extent of 75 per cent and more, we find that there is to be an increase of R23 per month. We find, however, that this R23 incorporates R15 in the form of an attendant’s allowance which a miner already got previously. We know that at that stage of their illness in all probability they would have been paid an attendant’s allowance of R15. In practice, therefore, the last stage miner is only getting an increase of R8, or roughly an increase of 11 per cent. Now, when you take into consideration the fact that the cost of living has risen by 9.5 per cent since 1956, what extra amount is this man in actual fact getting? Only 1.5 per cent! In view of these facts, I think that the hon. the Minister should adjust these scales of pensions in the Committee Stage. If you consider that a miner with a disability of 75 per cent, is “technically dead”—that is the expression which medical men use—then you will agree with me that this increase is very little indeed.

In regard to the decision to abolish the lump sum payment and to spread it over a period of eight years, I want to state that I accept the arguments that there may be many miners who fritter away the money when they get it as a lump sum payment, with the result that within a short time their families have not got the benefit of that compensation any more. There are, however a large number of prudent pensioners amongst the miners. These people invest this money in the best possible manner—for the purpose perhaps of establishing a home for themselves and their families, or for purchasing a plot, or establishing themselves in business of their own etc. In this way, we find that there are many miners to-day who possess their own plots living in the fresh open air, and making a fairly good living. This has become possible only through the lump sum payment they received. We must, therefore, give consideration to those miners who invest their money wisely, and not deprive them of this lump sum payment.

If one examines this Bill, one finds that the first stage of pneumoconiosis is conceded only when there is an impairment of the lung function to the extent of 20 per cent. The position up to now has been that a miner has been regarded as suffering from pneumoconiosis of the first stage, when dust has been detected in his lungs. He would then have been certified and placed on pension. If a miner who had not been certified, died, and it was found on post mortem examination that there were the slightest signs of dust on his lungs, the widow received the lump sum payment of R960. But what is the position going to be under this Bill when a miner is found to have dust on his lungs although he was not previously certified? Will the widow of that miner also get some compensation, even if the miner was not infected to the extent prescribed, i.e. 20 per cent? If not, a large number of widows are going to be prejudiced, in comparison with what happened under the old Bill. If it is borne in mind that there are roughly from 20 to 25 new cases of pneumoconiosis per annum, one realizes that this is an aspect in regard to which there must be absolute clarity, so that any worries on the part of these widows can be eliminated.

I say this because it was accepted by the hon. member for Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher), as well as by the hon. the Minister, that although the new basis is certainly more scientific than the old one, it still represents a certain amount of “educated guesswork” on the part of the certifying panel as to what actually is the extent of impairment. We do not know when it is going to be 21 per cent or when it is going to be 17 per cent. It will be purely an arbitrary average based on experience overseas. We have to provide for future contingencies which might arise in this regard. I should like to suggest to the hon. the Minister that instead of taking the first stage at 20 per cent to 50 per cent, it should be 20 per cent to 40 per cent. Similarly, instead of the second stage being from 50 per cent to 75 per cent, it should be at 40 per cent to 65 per cent, with the third stage from 65 per cent, upwards. I suggest this especially in view of the fact that it is generally accepted that with a disability of 75 per cent a miner is techncially “dead” and cannot, consequently, be of any value to the mining industry, to his family or to himself. Even with a disability of 50 per cent a man is disabled to such an extent that he cannot be of much advantage to his employers.

In connection with the question of Bantu labourers, the hon. the Minister did make reference to the fact that they will be receiving a lump sum payment of about R480. In this connection I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister for including, for the first time, Coloureds under this legislation. As far as these two groups are concerned, I think it will be conceded that nowhere in the world has any industry played such a helpful and excellent role in looking after the welfare and health of its employees as the mining industry in this country has, towards the Bantu labourer.

The Minister dealt with the position of the marginal mines and the manner in which they will get relief under this Bill. I welcome the suggestions for assisting these mines and especially to I welcome the establishment of a Technical Committee to ascertain the question of the degree of pneumoconiosis dust in the old mines. Up to now, the marginal mines have been suffering under a disability in this regard, in that they have been made to pay a higher levy than the rich mines, under the false and unreal supposition that there is more dust in an old mine than in a new mine. I am particularly pleased that the hon. the Minister has now removed this anomaly, and that the marginal mines will be given assistance which will prolong their lives and bring sustained employment in those areas in which this question of the marginal mines is a very grave problem. It is found that some of the new rich mines pay roughly 4s. 6d. a day levy, whilst some of the old mines can pay up to as much as 39s. 6d. The average, however, is about 9s. a day, and that is a heavy responsibility on a mine with high working costs and low ore payability. In that regard this is a welcome innovation, to find that this relief will now be given to the marginal mines. One wonders, in regard to the question of the welfare of a miner, whether we should devote ourselves wholly and solely to payment of pneumoconiosis benefits only. When one remembers that less than 4 per cent of the White miners ever contract pneumoconiosis, I think consideration should be given to the other 96 per cent who cannot profitably carry on earning what they did in years gone by, because as they grow older there is a loss of earning capacity. Other ailments contracted as the result of mining occur, like ulcers, rheumatism, arthritis etc. and one wonders whether we should not give consideration to using certain of these funds, which are now being made available in terms of the Bill, to develop and improve a comprehensive pension scheme for miners. You will then be able to overcome the problem which has worried the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. M. J. van den Berg), and in this regard I want to say to him that I do not think his figures—in comparing the small pension of a miner’s phthisis sufferer with that of a Railway pensioner—is correct, because he has overlooked the fact that the miners are now only getting a small pension. One hopes that as time goes on this pension fund will increase and therefore their pension will be bigger; but at the moment there is a small pension available to them of approximately R23 a month, and under those circumstances the argument of the hon. member for Krugersdorp really falls away.

A further aspect that worries one is the necessity for a statement that I feel the hon. the Minister should make, in regard to the position of the old miners who had no cardiograph taken before, but who may now contract the disease. What basis will be used in order to establish the degree of impairment of an old miner, in comparison with a new miner coming into the mines? The new miner will undergo his examinations and his condition can thus readily be ascertained, and as time goes on any deterioration in his condition can be detected. But what is the position of a miner who has been in the mines for the past 20 to 25 years, where no cardiograph had been taken, and you now have to compare his condition with what it was in the past? I think a clear statement by the Minister in this regard will bring a lot of relief and clarity as far as the miners are concerned.

I would like also to ask the Minister if he could not arrange a more definite form of contact and liaison between the Department of Health and the Department of Mines in regard to the aftercare treatment of tuberculosis cases. I am referring particularly to the case of the Bantu, and not as much to the White worker in the mines, who is taken care of to a great extent by the Chamber of Mines at places like Springfield Sanitorium, and he is getting exceptionally fine treatment from the mining industry. But so far as the Bantu is concerned who contracts tuberculosis and subsequently leaves the mine, he may be cured, possibly completely, but there is always the danger that if he goes back to his tribal home—after he has received the compensation for his disease—he may infect other people. At present I understand that the liaison between the two Departments is not sufficiently close to keep regular and adequate contact with these cases. It is something that we have to concern ourselves with to a much greater extent than before, in order to prevent disease being spread right throughout the country. I hope that this Bill will be applied with sympathy and justice as far as the miners are concerned, but I cannot associate myself with all the tributes that have been paid to the Minister that everything in this Bill is absolutely satisfactory, and meets all the requirements of the miners. I think there is a lot of scope for improvement, particularly on the financial side, and I do hope that in the committee stage the Minister will accept certain amendments which will meet the cases I have mentioned this evening.

Mr. Speaker, I should also like to congratulate the Minister with this legislation, but not in all respects. There are certain very great improvements, but then again we find that more improvements could have been effected. Where we do find improvements here are e.g. that to-day a reviewing committee will be appointed. That was a complaint we frequently had from the miners, that there was no appeal board any longer. In the explanation, and even in the Bill, we see that the two committees, the certifying committee and the reviewing committee, will sit jointly. Now I am wondering whether it would not be better if these persons were qualified specialists that are appointed to do the reviewing, and were to meet on their own to certify or reject the person. It seems to me that if the two come together, there may possibly, not deliberately—perhaps the one may persuade the other to accept something. Another advantage in the Act is that the panel doctor will be able to say something about his patient. As we know, formerly no notice was taken of the panel doctor or the family doctor. It was simply futile for the man to go to the Bureau with a certificate and try to satisfy them that it is the finding of his family doctor. This is a very great improvement. There is another improvement, but I should like to ask the Minister whether he will not review it later, namely the silica content of 10 per cent where the Minister may from 10 per cent upwards schedule such a mine as a controlled mine. But it is a well-known fact that 10 per cent is already very high, and that people may contract the disease under those circumstances, and even where it is less than 10 per cent, for the dust is there.

Then I should like to ask the Minister what the position is in regard to the persons operating the stampers, (crushers), and even on the mine dumps. We know from experience that those people also contract pneumoconiosis, and I may perhaps not have seen it, but I have gone through the Bill fairly carefully, and I did not find those people being covered anywhere. It is of importance. We know that under the circumstances nothing can be altered. The Act has come before us as a fait accompli, and we have to accept it in this form.

No, why?

But I should like to ask the Minister that he and his advisers should keep an eye on things and if they find that during this year fewer people are certified than under the old Act, he shall step in immediately and revise it. We are now breaking new ground. As a layman I do not know whether the medical men have advanced so far that they can tell us precisely that this new Act can succeed. It is still in the experimental stage.

Then I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that I am very sorry about the R960 the miner is being deprived of. I do not know what the circumstances are. Possibly the financial position is such that it can no longer be paid, but what would now have been better than if this fine gesture could have been made, that the miner in his second stage, when he leaves, could receive that R960 plus that pension which is only equivalent to the old scales. There is no change. It would be a fine gesture from our side. I really feel that under the circumstances we cannot do anything now, but if the Minister finds it possible within a year that something can be done about it, I shall be glad. The hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. M. J. van den Berg) has mentioned the case of the railway man. We know that the railwayman is a contributor himself, but now I should like to ask why we did not introduce such a scheme for the miner so that he also could be a contributor and also could receive a lump sum plus his pension. The comparison the hon. member for Krugersdorp has made was quite correct, that a railwayman gets that lump sum plus his pension, and it is a good deal more than this man, who sacrificed his health, receives. The man in any other industry is still capable of doing any other kind of work when he retires, but the miner has lost his health. I think the Government and the Chamber of Mines should co-operate in this regard and something should be done in future for the miner to improve his pension.

As regards the widows, I am very pleased that something extra is being done for them too, and that they will receive something more after the death of their husbands. There are even the improvements in regard to the funeral expenses but those are the roses we bring after the man’s death. We should really have given these roses during his lifetime, for then he could have lived better. What is R30 for a person? Something should be done about this. Then I should like to ask the Minister this. This scale seems to be very high to me. If a person’s respiratory loss has dropped to 75 per cent—I wonder whether anybody in this House has ever seen such a person? I have, and it is a tremendous suffering and a struggle. This fourth stage, which is the third to-day, should not be higher than 65 per cent. Then the man still has a reasonable chance of carrying on. Now I should like to bring the following to the Minister’s attention. I see the Minister of Lands is not here, and it falls under his Vote, but we get the complaint from the miners that they have a great hunger for land, and their one ambition is to have their own little piece of land. Now they complain that they apply for an agricultural holding, but they are virtually not taken into consideration for it. It surely is a well-known fact that a large proportion of those miners were farmers who could not make a living on the land owing to drought or other causes, and that they had to go to the mines for a livelihood. When he leaves at the second stage, he should like to commence farming. I think that where we now have the new schemes that are to be commenced soon, something ought to be done for those people.

I wished to bring only these few points to the Minister’s attention. Before I conclude I should like to say that I feel that something else that is better could also have been done in respect of the tuberculotic. Why can that person also not be classified on the same basis as the pneumoconiotic? We know that before you can begin working on the mines, you have to pass a very severe medical test, and once the man has acquired that certificate, you should know that he is virtually 100 per cent healthy, and the mines are the cause of that man contracting silicosis or tuberculosis. But now he is not eligible for a pension, but only for a lump sum. He must have worked at least 200 to 3,000 shifts, and then he receives R1,500. After that he receives R2,000, but his condition must have deteriorated to such an extent that consideration will be given to perhaps helping him further. I feel we should do something for those people. They went to the mines in a healthy condition, and contracted the disease there.

I am going to start off with a complaint, although in general we welcome this Bill. This is a large Bill. The Minister took 1½ hours to explain it to us, and what it would mean to the mining industry. He told us that it was an agreed measure, but as the hon. member for Springs (Mr. Taurog) said, everyone does not agree with it. Nearly everything the Minister said was pregnant with meaning to us who come from the Reef. We should have had much more time to discuss this whole matter. I think we should have been given a White Paper. On the 24th of this month we got a letter, for which I am very grateful, from the Department, which helped us tremendously in digesting this Bill so far as we could. I have no complaints about the contents of this letter. It is full of information, but I believe that this Bill is of such importance that—and here I agree with the hon. member for Krugersdorp (Mr. M. J. van den Berg)—it should have gone to a Select Committee where it could have been dealt with on a non-party basis. However, that is about the only destructive thing I will say about the Bill. I welcome most of it, but I want to make one or two requests.

First of all, I want to say that most of the men in my constituency who are affected by this Bill welcome the restoration of the appeal board. I was up there a few days ago, and although this is not quite what they were asking for, it is an appeal board or a reviewing committee, and they will sit together with the board and come to a decision in the event of disagreement. I think this is a very reasonable attempt to get over the grievances that existed in the past and it will be accepted by most of us representing mining constituencies. I think we have all suffered on occasion from the fact that our own doctor friends do not always agree. I welcome also the fact that all Bantu will now be examined and not only those who work underground. But there is one matter in regard to which I want to cross swords with the Minister. I got a letter from the Department which says that the present lump sum payment of R960 will no longer be paid, but will be used to augment the pension during the last two stages, and similarly the compensation for Bantu will remain unchanged. I want to say that from previous experience of pensions I personally am in complete agreement with the spreading of the benefits. The commutation of pensions, in my experience, which is fairly wide, is that only in exceptional cases is it to the benefit of the man commuting his pension. The Minister explained to us that under Clause 88 there was still provision in deserving cases for a man to commute 50 per cent of his pension, which is about R500, but it can only be given after due consideration and it is not a right. I am in complete agreement with that policy, but where I want to cross swords with the Minister is this. The man was entitled to a lump sum payment of R960. He did not get it and it was then to be spread over his pension in his third or fourth stages. The hon. member for Springs calculated it at being about R10 a month over a number of years, but what will be the position if the man dies within three years? The words I wrote down for my own information are these: If a pensioner is expected to live ten years but lives only three years, is he to receive only 30 per cent of that R960 to which he was entitled, his widow nothing further? I may have read this wrongly, but I do not think so. I think that will be the practical effect, and if that is so I think it must receive the Minister’s consideration. It will mean that because the man is unlucky enough to die earlier, his widow suffers. I admit that it is all actuarially calculated, and I am trying to reduce this to simple terms, and the example I gave can possibly be attacked by an actuary, but basically I think it is correct. Of course the whole fund is run on an actuarial basis, but I think this point must receive the Minister’s consideration.

Now I want to welcome another thing, and that is the increase in the funeral allowance from R50 to R100. Anybody in this House who has had anything to do with the mining industry will realize that this is rather an extraordinary provision for any man working in a particular industry. The fact that the Government has always considered a man might die at his work is of particular significance. I merely mention it to bring home to the House the conditions under which men in the mining industry work, and nothing can bring this more to their attention that the fact that burial expenses have to form part of the benefits they receive when they can no longer work. Speakers on both sides of the House have stressed that these men have given their all to the industry. This country has ridden on the back of the mining industry for many years, and the health of these men is part of the price we pay.

Another matter I would like the Minister to investigate is the question of the training grants for the dependants of deceased miners. In this Bill the Minister makes provision for an increase in the amount for this purpose from R50,000 to R100,000 per annum, but he also said that it was hoped to extend these benefits as far as university and other specialized training was concerned. The report of the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Commissioner for 1961 says the following—

I have made a rough calculation and this works out at something like R60 odd per annum per child. I know education is not very expensive and that this assists them to a large extent, but on the face of it this seems to me a bit niggardly. I do not want to say anything more about it except to ask the Minister to keep his eye on this particular matter.

I want to support the hon. member for Springs in the suggestion that the beginning of the fourth stage should be not 75 per cent but 65 per cent. Again, it is very difficult for men who do not represent mining constituencies to realize how these fellows live when they become ill. Until you see it you cannot realize what it is. The Minister may attack me and say that I am being irresponsible and that I do not realize the financial implications, but I do not think he will do that because it will not be quite fair. I honestly and sincerely think that notwithstanding what the mining industry has said, and the mine workers’ unions, that 75 per cent is too high a rate for incapacity. Had I been given the opportunity of listening to evidence before a Select Committee, I might have been convinced that these figures are correct, but not having had that opportunity, I am afraid I must stand by what I feel, and again I must admit in all fairness that what I say is not based on actuarial calculations but on ordinary humanitarian considerations.

Finally, I, too, want to deal with this question of the marginal mines and the effect of the pneumoconiosis contributions on their future. The Minister and his predecessor—and he personally in the Other Place recently—explained that as far as he could see, he could not help the marginal mines except possibly through assistance in the reduction of the pneumoconiosis contributions. He mentioned that these average about 11d. a ton in the marginal mine. That is a considerable amount. The Minister said he was thinking of assisting these marginal mines by reducing their contributions. I sincerely trust that this assistance is not going to be the result of an actuarial calculation which would reduce the liability of the original contributors to the fund. I sincerely hope it will not be that, but that it will be as the result of the Government accepting its own responsibility towards assisting these areas by making a direct contribution to reduce the pneumoconiosis contributions of these mines.

There is much in this Bill that I welcome. It is very clear also that much intense and very com petent study form the basis of this Bill. I am sure that much research has been done, and to me the legislation is the result of scientific study and research, as the hon. the Minister also told us very clearly in his introductory speech. However, there are two matters in particular I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. Other hon. members have already referred to it. I feel less happy about these two aspects. It is clear that all of us are striving to lengthen the lives of those people and to bring about better and more pleasant working conditions for them, in legislation we pass here in the House of Assembly that affects the underground workers in the mines. The one thing we can do to achieve that is to get the person out of the mine, where he is employed in dusty air, sooner. There is only one way of taking a person out of his underground employment sooner, and that is to enable him financially to maintain a proper standard of living for the duration of his life. There is only one way of getting him out of that dusty atmosphere, I repeat, and that is to enable him financially to do so. I know it may be argued that in any other sector of the labour market he must be prepared to work up to a certain age, when he will qualify for a pension. in conditions that are different from the conditions of employment under which the miner has to work. The next question that arises is who should be responsible for making that miner financially able to leave the mine, that mine for which he has sacrificed his health while he was working. Who has to bear that responsibility? We have every sympathy with marginal mines that are having a difficult time, but the mining industry as a whole is not having such a bad time that it cannot enable that miner of his to leave the mine sooner. He need not be afraid then that he will not be able to attract labour forces to his mine; if the conditions of employment are made more attractive and if greater benefits are given to the miner at an earlier stage, more labour will be attracted to the mine. Otherwise than in many other occupations or industries. I should like to say this in regard to the mines, namely that vocational training is not given at schools. I do not know of one miner who has accepted work in a mine out of love for working underground. Circumstances beyond his control have forced him into it. I am not referring to the engineering division; I am not referring to the mine bosses such as mine captains and mine engineers who are trained sometimes to spend more hours above ground than underground. I am referring to the miner whom we know as a miner. I say that that industry for which he has sometimes sacrificed his health should see to it that he leaves the mine sooner. I am very thankful that the hon. the Minister, towards the end of his speech said that he will watch the position. He again referred to the basis of compensation for the miner, but I trust that if amendments are introduced after a year, this matter will be borne in mind very seriously. In this way then the miner will also have the opportunity of getting a small share of the profits he is exploiting and extracting from our soil. To bring that about, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make an urgent plea. I hope that when the Minister replies, he will be able to set my mind at rest in connection with this amount of R960 that is being taken away. I do not feel happy about the fact that this one amount which was given at a certain stage in the past, is now being given at a later stage now. I would urge that as soon as we see our way clear—we do not only want to say these things here, we also want to be practical—we should enable the miner financially to leave the mine not at the last stage but at the second stage when he has contracted either tuberculosis or pneumoconiosis. I agree also that we should, as far as practically possible, not fix this last stage at 75 per cent. Mr. Speaker, we know the miner; we have lived with him; we know him. By now taking away a sum of money that he could have had at an earlier stage and adding benefits at the later stage, you are simply forcing that man to strive after that diamond that hangs over the precipice, with all the dangers involved. We should also try to imagine the psychological effect this announcement has on the minds of the miner and his wife and his dependants. I am leaving it at that, but I should like once again to plead for greater financial benefits at an earlier stage so that that person may be able to leave the mine earlier.

The one thing I welcome in this Bill and for which I wish to thank the Minister and the draftsmen of the Bill, is the greater benefits now being given for the education of dependants of pneumoconiotics. I am very thankful for that. We notice that the amount has been doubled. In terms of the old Act, the amount that could be appropriated was R50,000, and this Bill now provides for R100,000. I have on a previous occasion under the Vote of the Minister of Mines pleaded for an increase of that amount, and I am very grateful to see it in the new Bill. We are also particularly grateful to see that the field of education is being extended. Formerly it could only be a trade that had been prescribed, and it did not provide for university training or training at a university college. We thank the Minister that education may be permitted in that direction also in future. I wish to say this particularly when I thank the Minister. We should bear in mind that we are extracting wealth from the soil of South Africa that cannot be restored. Every ton of ore we extract from the earth, has been extracted once and for all, and we cannot restore it. Therefore we cannot enrich the earth again otherwise than in respect of agriculture. I hope this amount will be adjusted from time to time and will be increased to enable us to use these children and dependants of pneumoconiotics, this human material, in which we can plough back a part of these profits. There is not one miner who encourages his son ever to follow in his father’s footsteps. We should enable the dependants of this sufferer from a vocational disease that he has contracted in a dusty mine to render service to South Africa in a sphere other than that in which his father has done so, not so much only for the sake of the terror the mine holds for him, but for the sake of the fact that perhaps there will not always be gold mines in South Africa in which he could work. We should now use a part of those profits to enrich the human material in this country. So we thank the Minister for this sum of money that is being granted for the education of the children of pneumoconiotics.

It is very pleasant to see the measure of agreement in regard to this Bill. I say it is very pleasant, for things are no longer as lively as they perhaps were earlier this afternoon. I should like very much, with reference to a remark by the hon. member for Rosettenville (Dr. Fisher), to say a few words. With a broad smile he told us that he would very much like to read the Hansard of 1958 to us. He was keen to read to us how the then hon. Minister took him to task because he pleaded that we should have a lung function test. The reason why I am taking him up on that, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that the hon. the Minister at that time never scolded him for that statement, but he scolded him because the hon. member for Rosettenville attacked the Act. He can see it in Col. 104. He attacked the draftsmen of the Act, and said that one would think that all of them suffered from a permanent defect in their heads. That is the reason why the hon. the Minister attacked him. The hon. member knows that; I see how heartily he is laughing. I think it might be as well if I mentioned it. I have to point out to him also that there was a reason in fact why the National Party opposed the old board of appeal, why the National Party no longer wanted an appeal board. It was not that we refused to have a review, but we felt that the type of appeal board that existed, and the manner in which it functioned, were so hopeless that we were not keen to have something similar. That is why the hon. the Minister is now coming along with something which we believe will be better and more effective than that appeal board. I do not think it is necessary for the hon. member to quote Hansard to us.

The hon. member has also said that he should like to see the stages being changed, not from 20 per cent to 50 per cent, but from 20 per cent to 40 per cent, 50 per cent, 65 per cent. He made the remark that if 50 per cent of your respiratory capacity is impaired then you are, as he expressed it, only half a human being. I am not an expert such as he is, but I want to submit that that is an erroneous statement. If someone has an impairment of 50 per cent of his respiratory capacity, then he is not half a human being by far. The hon. member and the other hon. members who referred to it, are confusing it with the idea of 50 per cent working capacity. It is something completely different. I contend that if you have a 50 per cent loss of lung function, you are not half a human being by far, but you can still do much good work. Another aspect he referred to is that he should stop working at 65 per cent instead of 75 per cent. If we knew enough about that figure, we could perhaps argue. But if we were to discharge workers who have lost 65 per cent of their lung function, I wonder if that is what the miners will want, for that is what it is going to mean. According to the hon. member the man who has 65 per cent impairment of his lung function should be declared unfit and discharged. I do not believe that any miner will thank me if I were to vote in favour of his leaving his employment so much earlier. We should remember that where we now have the figure of 75 per cent, it is somewhat earlier already than the old fourth stage. I do not know whether I am expressing myself well, but if a person is certified as 75 per cent impairment of his respiratory capacity, I say it happens earlier than he would be certified to-day under the old fourth stage. If we were to reduce it still further to 65 per cent, then I am afraid we shall have to discharge too many of those people against their wishes. If we have to discharge them and we can pay them higher pensions, I am in favour of it. I do not think there is a single member here who would not like to see higher pensions. But when we are discussing these things, we must try to remain within the limits of possibilities. That is why I say we must be careful and not just play with figures here. The hon. member also asked, if I understood him correctly, that two lay members should serve on the reviewing committee. Perhaps I misunderstood him, but that is how I understood him. I do not know what the hon. the Minister’s reply to that will be. but on my part I should like to ask him to to accept such a proposal. I for my part should like to point out that an impossible situation will arise when a reviewing committee is sitting and when there are two lay members present when they are discussing the case of a patient. Firstly those laymen will not understand a thing about the whole matter. Both of them will be a nil on a contract. In addition those two members will be embarrassed for the doctors will talk about things they know nothing about. They will be very seriously embarrassed. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, it is not the custom of doctors to discuss the intimate affairs of their patients—and it will be intimate affairs when they are concerned with a borderline case—in the presence of laymen. So I hope the hon. the Minister will not accede to that request.

The hon. member for Springs (Mr. Taurog) made a further statement, and said that at the fourth stage the majority of the people receive attendant’s allowances, with the result that very few of them will benefit from this extra amount what is now being granted to persons in the fourth stage. I do not want to create the impression that I do not want a fourth stage person to get more. I should like to give him more. But I say than when you are dealing with these things, your facts must be correct. The hon. member for Springs has pleaded and made this statement, namely that the majority of your fourth stage sufferers will receive an attendant’s allowance in any event. I say that is not so, less than half receive it. The correct figures is 1,003 fourth stage sufferers of whom 444 receive the attendant’s allowance. 559 do not get it, and they will get the benefit of the extra R15 per month. Those are the facts. If someone asks for more, I shall be prepared to support it if it is possible, but your facts have to be correct when you come along with arguments. I myself feel sorry for these 444 and my sincere hope and wish is that something can be done for those people. I know everybody desires that. There is not one of us who does not keenly wish it. When I say that, Sir, I should like to emphasize once again that I think all of us feel satisfied about the new reviewing committee for which provision is being made in this Bill. I am sure that all the miners will accept it as a step in the right direction. There were difficulties and problems always. If we study the various reports of Allen, Beyers and Oosthuizen, we shall come to the conclusion that all of them decded that too much emphasis is laid in an examination on the X-ray examination, and too little on the clinical examination. There was a time when silicosis and pulmonary diseases were regarded as two distinct diseases. The Oosthuizen Committee stated the matter very clearly and pointed out that in fact it is one conception, and that the one is the result of the other. The committee very clearly showed that the grading of these diseases should not be based on the extent of the X-ray plate alone, but that it should really be based on the clinical finding. That is why they decided that a lung function test should be put into operation. In those days when the committee came along with its findings, the feeling still was that the lung function tests had perhaps not yet been developed to that extent, but during the past five/six years we have reached that stage—although there still are differences of opinion—that experts consider that you can determine up to 1 per cent of the impairment of the lung function. The experts maintain that we shall be able to do so within 5 per cent with the methods they intend applying under this Act. That is why I say that we can be glad that we are getting away from the old method of grading according to the working method, for at the best of times it was based on the X-ray plates and guess-work. That is why there was so much difference of opinion and that is why so many mistakes were made. I am convinced that when we introduce these new methods, so many mistakes will not be made. For in the first place the doctor is not required to indicate the impairment to the nearest one or two per cent. A wide margin is left of 1 per cent to 20 per cent, as we know, from 20 per cent to 50 per cent and 50 per cent to 75 per cent. A very wide margin has been left so that the chances of making a mistake are not so great. Apart from that the doctor still retains his clinical methods. He has the history of the patient and he still uses his X-ray methods and he still retains his discretion. And that is an important aspect, Mr. Speaker. When I say that this method that will now be applied is a very much better method, I should like to make an earnest appeal to the hon. the Minister. I should like to ask him to use his influence to see to it that the doctors who do the certifying should bear two things in mind. The one is sympathetic dealing with the patient. The other is that the principle should be maintained that if there is any doubt as regards the disease or the degree of the disease, the doctor should give the worker the benefit of that doubt. I have reason to ask that, Mr. Speaker. I want to say very clearly that I am not here to launch an attack on the certifying committee, which consists of leading persons. But the fact remains that because we are human beings, your best methods can make mistakes. The fact remains that we are dealing here not with mathematical acts, but with human beings. The fact of the matter is that you cannot measure diseases and people with mathematical precision. That is why I ask that if there is any doubt, the worker should get the benefit of that doubt. I am doing so on the basis of cases we have come across. I am mindful of persons who cannot walk 30 paces without some discomfort, but they have not been certified. I am not blaming the doctor, but they have not been certified because it could not be proved that the person was suffering from pneumoconiosis in spite of the fact that he had all kinds of treatments in hospital and in spite of the fact that he was stopped from working underground, all of which indicated that there was a very strong suspicion; in spite of the fact that his father was suffering similarly and that it was only ascertained after his death. I am not taking that as an exceptional case. If you look at the latest annual report of the bureau, at page 10, you will see that of 37 persons examined and not certified, it was found that all of them were suffering from an advanced degree of pneumoconiosis. After the films had been checked it was found that 24 of these 37 persons could and should have been certified three to 12 months ago already. It is here I wish to thank the hon. the Minister for the remarks he made in regard to miniature X-rays. I want to submit it has some bearing on this picture. I know it is a very sore point with the miner. I know he will appreciate it if this particular aspect could receive attention. I mention another case from this annual report. Reference is made here to 105 persons who were not certified, but who were found to be pneumoconiotics after their death. According to this report, there were 26.7 per cent whose X-ray films showed that they had suffered from this disease. In the case of 77, nothing could be ascertained during their lives. I repeat that mistakes can be made. It has been provided that even with the best tests it was claimed that 77 persons had nothing wrong with them, yet they were suffering from the disease. That is why I ask the Minister to try, because there will always be borderline cases, because there will always be cases that will fall within the discretion of the doctor, that the accepted policy of the doctors should be that they will not refuse a certificate unless they can prove that the patient is not suffering from pneumoconiosis; that they should never refuse a certificate because they cannot prove the contrary.

I should like to make a few remarks in regard to research in medical treatment. In 1956 we put the house in order. Now we are dealing with legislation that improves the Act of 1956. I think that as the National Party Government has always been known as the friend of the mine worker, it is the opportunity for the Government now to show that it is also his father and doctor. That is why I should like to make a very strong plea. As the principle is laid down in Clause 102, I think, that money should be set aside for research in medical treatment, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to see that this will not become just the dead letter of the law, but that effect will be given to it. I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, that research be done not only in connection with the prevention of pneumoconiosis as regards underground ventilation etc. but that very much more research should be done as regards the cure itself. I think it is necessary that the requisite facilities be established in Johannesburg, and I think it is important that similar facilities be established on the Free State goldfields, so that research may be conducted in regard to the prevention of pneumoconiosis with the patient as such. It should be ascertained whether we cannot delay the disease which is progressive—progressive in another sense. We should conduct research in order to determine whether those sufferers cannot be transferred to other types of work. I think it is necessary. We know that certain experiments are being conducted in countries such as Australia and Canada. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to send officials to go and see what is being done over there. I conclude by urging that we should devote much more attention to the cure of the pneumoconiotic. The fact is that from the medical point of view we are dealing with the flower of the country

here. They are healthy young men we are sending underground in the mines. When we send them down there, we already know what the end is going to be. In the meantime

we may as well sign the certificate and that

is exactly what we are doing. After so many years we diagnose the disease, we hang a label on the man’s neck and for practical purposes that is all we do. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that that is quite wrong. So far as I know, there is only one small place at the General Hospital in Johannesburg—I withdraw my words if I am wrong—where these people undergo special treatment. I want to urge that at every hospital a ward or two should be placed at the disposal of the experts. If we cannot do so in all hospitals, let us then do so at the East Rand and West Rand and at Klerksdorp, at Odendaalsrust, Welkom and Barberton. We must have places where people who have special knowledge of the matter can give the pneumoconiotic the necessary treatment. Treatment can be given; lung exercises can be given; medicaments can be used by inhaling etc. Instruction can be given in regard to the use of cigarettes and alcohol etc. We must help to save manpower for our country. We cannot afford to waste our manpower in the way we are doing to-day. I submit that if we tackle this matter properly, we shall be able to keep a man in the mine for from five to ten years longer. We must be able to contrive it, so that he and his wife and his dependants may have the happiness of being able to live together longer and in health.

It being 10.25 p.m. the business under consideration was interrupted by Mr. Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No. 26 (1), and the debate was adjourned until 29 May.