Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Constantia will forgive me for not replying to the speech he was delivering when the House adjourned last night. I take it that the hon. the Minister will reply to the requests he made. I should very much like to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to a certain matter concerning my constituency. I refer to the section between Cookhouse and East London, and I want to point out that in the district of Bedford, which is situated on this section in my constituency, there are fine pastures. During the past summer those pastures were destroyed by veld fires on several occasions as a result of the steam locomotives which are still used on that section. Now, we are extremely grateful to the hon. the Minister and the staff of the Railways for the diesel locomotives which have already been put into service on that section, but I nevertheless want to make the request that the few steam locomotives still remaining on that section be replaced by diesel locomotives as well.

I should like to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Bethlehem yesterday when he took the view that the task of the Railways was one of making a contribution to the development of the Republic of South Africa. In this regard I should like to congratulate the hon. the Minister and the staff of the Railways on the exceptional contribution which they have indeed made to the development of the Republic. It is generally emphasized that it is necessary for our country to concentrate more and more on the export trade. In this regard we should note that 86% of all exports consists of raw materials and that 80% of that export trade originates more than 150 kilometres from the nearest harbour and has to be transported over those distances by the Railways. This places a major and an extremely responsible task on the shoulders of the Railways. I immediately want to point out that we have nothing but the highest praise for the task which the Railways fulfils in such a fine manner by constantly stimulating that export trade. This places a major and very important task on the shoulders of the staff of the Railways.

We should note that the officials of the Railways have indeed increased by about 3 000 during the past financial year. We rejoice in the fact that the Railway official has a very good and sympathetic employer, which is proved by the fact that during the past decade we have witnessed an average annual increase of 7,95% in the income of the Railway official. This we must see in the light of an average annual increase in the cost of living of 3,6% during that same period. That leaves the Railway official with a fine increase in his income. But it does not take away the fact that we have a shortage of certain officials on the Railways, for example, plate-layers, signalmen, drivers for delivery services and road motor services, etc. One finds that there were approximately 19 800 resignations from the Railways during the past financial year. On the other hand we had more than 22 000 applications for re-employment from ex-Railway officials. Now we find that only 29,9% of those 22 000 ex-Railway officials who applied were allowed to return to the Service. On this occasion I should like to plead for a more indulgent approach to the exercise of service discipline. We know that the grass on the other side of the fence often looks greener than the grass on this side of the fence, but I believe that many of these officials who originally resigned from the Railways, regretted that step and returned to the Railways to be re-employed as an official of the Administration. For that reason I want to plead with the hon. the Minister and with the staff to adopt a more indulgent approach and to be more indulgent in handling these applications for re-employment from our ex-Railway officials.

On this occasion I should like to thank the hon. the Minister and the staff for what they do in my constituency. I want to wish them well in their very difficult task, and I hope that the Railways will always remain the happy home of the Railway official, for whom I have the highest praise. Within the framework of the Railway official’s family, many a noble son and daughter receive their education, in spite of the Railway official’s unsettled family life. Here I can bear testimony to the fact that some of the most exemplary voters come from the Railways Administration. Therefore I have the fullest confidence in them, and I am glad that a person such as the hon. member for Umhlatuzana has preferred to resign from the Railway service, because the larger the number of that type of dyed-in-the-wool U.P. supporter who resigns, the better things will go for the Railway Administration.

Mr. Chairman, we listened with interest to the speech made by the hon. member for Somerset East. He did very well, except for the last few moments, and we forgive him for that because he made such a favourable impression during the first nine minutes of his speech in which he raised one matter after another which is near to the Opposition’s heart. Then he thought it necessary, during the last minute of his speech, to prove that he still was a Nationalist. I only hope that the hon. the Minister will give serious attention and reply sympathetically to the important questions put by the hon. member when he was speaking on behalf of the railwaymen and forgot for a moment that he was a politician first and foremost.

Sir, I should like to raise three matters with the hon. the Minister. The first may seem unimportant and insignificant, but unfortunately it affects the comfort and the security of those people who use the trains on the local services on the Rand between Springs and Randfontein. Many of our members on this side receive complaints that many of the destination boards are damaged by rascals. It almost seems as though this is done wilfully in order to cause inconvenience to the Railways and passengers on those lines. Very often when the trains arrive, the people do not know which train they should board; it would be of great assistance if the management would see to it that a regular check is carried out to ensure that the destination boards on the passenger coaches indicate the correct destination clearly.

The next task which I should like to discuss with the hon. the Minister is this: We understand that the Administration is planning to increase Railway tariffs by approximately 20%, or let me rather put it this way: In order to meet the deficits which have accumulated and which are accumulating, and also to make provision for the increased salaries, it is necessary to increase tariffs by 20%. But, Sir, the more one analyses the increases which have been announced, and the more one comes to realize that there are hidden increases—for example, in the old days the cost of an invoice when one consigned goods, was 10 cents and at present it is 50 cents—the more one wonders whether the increase in tariffs will not be more than 20% in actual practice. The question I want to put to the Minister, is this: If, on the basis of the experience he gains in the course of the new financial year, it appears that the Railways receive more than a 20% increase on the tariffs which existed up to the end of last year, will the Railway user be accommodated in this regard? I do not mean that this should be done if there is an increase in the traffic, for then the Railways are entitled to any benefit they derive from that. But if it should appear, in the light of experience, that the revenue of the Railways have increased by more than 20%, without a corresponding increase in the volume of traffic, will the Minister in that case do what he did last year? Last year, without coming to Parliament, he increased the tariffs. In that case will he, without coming to Parliament, decrease the tariffs so as to ensure that the Railways do not receive more than a 20% increase on tariffs and that the Railways do not make a larger contribution to inflation and the rising cost of living than is really necessary?

†The third point I want to raise with the hon. the Minister is this: We have heard about the plans the Minister has in connection with the Sishen-Saldanha railway line. He has now handed it over to Iscor, and they are going to run the longest, the largest and an unprecedented private line in the history of transport in South Africa. But the Minister has made it perfectly clear to us—and we support him—that if ever that line had to become anything more than a single-purpose line, the South African Railways would take over. I want to know from the Minister what assurance he has that it will be possible when the time comes, if it does come, to take over that line and to integrate it with the rest of the South African Railways transport system. Has he got an assurance for example, that the gauge of the Iscor line and the gauge of the South African Railways will be the same?

It will be the same.

I am very pleased to hear that, Sir. The hon. the Minister knows by now that I do not attach much importance to rumours, but there are insistent rumours at the moment that Iscor, in order to made the line pay at the very low capital figure they have indicated they are willing to expend on the construction of this line, are contemplating having a gauge which will be in accordance with that of certain large European systems, which will enable them to buy rolling stock and locomotives at a price much lower than they would have to pay if they had rolling stock and locomotives manufactured especially for the narrow-gauge line of South Africa. I am satisfied that the Minister and his Administration will resist any attempt to run the Iscor-Saldanha line on a gauge more suitable for the purposes of a one-purpose line than it would be for an integrated line with the rest of the South African Railways. In view of all the rumours that are about—and they are insistent and they come from normally reliable sources—the Minister should take this opportunity of making it perfectly clear to the Iron and Steel Corporation and to the public of South Africa that such an important private single-purpose line will only be built—and that he has the support of the Cabinet for this—if they conform to the 3 ft. 6 in. gauge, which is common to the railway lines of South Africa. I think the Minister might welcome this opportunity of giving an assurance to the public and especially to the North-Western Cape. The people there expected so much from this line and have been so bitterly disappointed by the fact that what they hoped for will not be achieved immediately, that they will welcome assurance that perhaps some day in the future their wishes and their dreams will be fulfilled.

Sir, in the course of my speech I should like to refer to the last point to which the hon. member for Yeoville has just referred. But today I should like to exchange a few ideas about the stretch of railway line, from Hotazel to Kimberley, which passes through the richest ore bearing area in South Africa. This stretch of line begins at Hotazel with the rich manganese deposits, then over Sishen, Lohathla and Postmasburg with their iron ore deposits, over Danielskuil and Lime Acres with their lime and diamonds, and then transports these riches to the Northern Cape to the export markets or to our inland markets. Sir, this Kimberley/ Hotazel stretch of line has been publicly shown to be one of the most profitable railway lines in South Africa. At present this railway line carries 10% of the total tonnage being transported by the South African Railways. As a result of the intelligent and far-sighted planning of the South African Railways, the carrying capacity of this railway line has always kept pace with the development in the area which it serves. With the establishment of a central traffic control system, the use of better and stronger locomotives and the use of specially designed ore trucks, the South African Railways is today capable of having a practical capacity of 31 trains on this line, which can carry an average of about 50 000 tons per day. If one works this out, it means that this railway line is able to carry about 18 million tons of ore per year. This is quite a bit more than the present mass offered for transport on this line. In view of the fact that the line’s load during 1971 was about 11 million tons, there is consequently an additional capacity of about 7 million tons available on this line. For a few years, therefore, there is still enough room for expansion on this highly profitable railway line. We also appreciatively take note of the considerable amount in the present Budget to strengthen this line even further and to improve it, thereby increasing its carrying capacity as well as its efficiency. Developments that have already been planned for a long time, and new complications in respect of inland ore exports and ore processing entail, in my opinion, that the carrying capacity of this Hotazel/Kimberley stretch of line possibly be saturated within a few years. In his Second Reading speech the hon. the Minister indicated that further consideration would be given to the St. Croix scheme to give other ore exporters, those who cannot make use of the Sishen/Saldanha line, the opportunity to export through St. Croix as well. The hon. the Minister also indicated that the present Port Elizabeth harbour handles a capacity of 6,35 million metric tons of ore, and the line can deliver far more ore than this to this harbour. During 1972 only 4,3 million tons of ore were handled at this harbour, and the Minister indicated that between 1973 and 1975 about 6,395 million tons of ore per year can or will be handled at this harbour. This entails that the load on the Hotazel/Kimberley stretch of line ought therefore to increase by 2,095 million tons during 1973 to 1975, if the quantity of ore that can be handled at the harbour at Port Elizabeth is supplemented. But I should like to quote what the hon. member for Von Brandis mentioned here yesterday. He said—

The hon. member for Von Brandis speaks with a certain measure of authority on behalf of these people. For the sake of argument I want to accept the fact that the exporters, on whose behalf the hon. member spoke, will continue with the St. Croix project and that they will be able to carry it out and develop it and that the exporters will then export an additional 5 million tons through St. Croix from 1975, which, together with the 2 million ton capacity of the present Port Elizabeth harbour, means that by 1975 the exporters envisage exporting an additional mass of 7 million tons through St. Croix. The result of this is that the Hotazel/Kimberley stretch of line will have to carry an additional 7 million tons of ore from 1975. If we look at the ore that must be transported over this stretch of line for inland use, we find that Sishen alone is expected to transport the following quantities of ore to Vanderbijlpark and Newcastle in the next ten years: In 1973-’74 it will be 4,7 million tons; in 1974-’75, 6,45 million tons; in 1976-’77, 7,85 million tons; in 1977-’78, 9,13 million tons; in 1978-’79, 10,73 million tons; in 1980-’81, 11,1 million tons, and in 1981-’82, 13,05 million tons. In other words, while the present stretch of line has been carrying about 11 million tons in 1972, and if we look at the mass that this stretch of line must therefore carry in the next ten years, the picture is more or less as follows: Present load about 11 million tons, plus 7 million tons of ore for export through St. Croix plus 13 million tons of ore over this stretch of line transported to our inland markets. Altogether 31 million tons. If we take into consideration the rate at which ore development and production has progressed in this region over the past few years, I want to predict that the figure I have just mentioned is very small in comparison with what it could be in the next few years. Great quantities of manganese are going to be exported. It is a fact that the world’s biggest manganese fields are situated here and that the present world consumption is 6 million tons per year. The United States’ Bureau of Mines has indicated, however, that the world demand for manganese in the year 2000 will be 18 million tons, and the major portion of that will also have to be transported by means of this railway line. If we take these facts into consideration, it can be accepted that this stretch of line will have to carry millions of tons of manganese within a few years. By furnishing these particulars, I should like to indicate that this stretch of line, with its present capacity of about 18 million tons per year, will reach saturation point within a few years.

I therefore want to advocate to the hon. the Minister not to double this 340 kilometre stretch of line. I want to lodge a very serious plea with the hon. the Minister—I wish I could go down on my knees—that as an alternative to doubling he must build us a railway line that will be 180 kilometre long and serve as a by-pass line from Sishen through Kuruman to join up with other existing lines in the vicinity of Vryburg. If such a by-pass line is constructed, ore supplies for inland use can be transported on this very much shorter route to Pretoria, Vanderbijlpark and Newcastle. If we accept that the 13 million tons, which will have to be transported in the foreseeable future to the inland foundries of Iscor, are placed on these alternative lines, it would immediately place this avoiding line on an economic footing. One must not lose sight of the fact that it will also be possible to place a great many other loads on that line. I should also like to mention those other bads, but time does not allow me to do so. The Hotazel stretch of line can still carry its full capacity and this can still keep it one of the most profitable railway lines in the Republic of South Africa.

This by-pass line creates the opportunity for a lovely town like Kuruman, with its abundance of water, tremendous high-grade lime deposits, its asbestos production, the Bantu homeland situated nearby for a beautiful town like Reivilo, which has one of the biggest cheese factories in the world, and for Vryburg and its environs to have an infrastructure that can allow development to take place.

I should like to mention a few disadvantages of doubling. The doubling of the Hotazel/Kimberley stretch of line will perpetuate the present rail distance between Sishen and the steel factories of Vanderbijl park and Newcastle. If we take into account that the transport costs of iron ore constitute 72% of the total production costs per ton of iron ore mined at Sishen and delivered to Vanderbijlpark, it is clear that such a shortened railway line over Sishen, Kuruman and Vryburg to Vanderbijlpark and Newcastle shortens the distance tremendously and will be of great benefit to our steel production. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Kuruman will excuse me if I do not follow up in detail on what he said. In connection with the matter which he broached in respect of his part of the world, I want to say that we are grateful that the hon. the Minister has now given his blessing to the St. Croix matter. We want to express the hope that the yen and the rand will not eventually drift so far apart that the lovely dreams of the hon. member for Kuruman will go unrealized.

In the time at my disposal I should like to discuss a few matters with the hon. the Minister in the following order: I want to speak about the Bantu passenger traffic between Mdantsane and East London. Then I want to speak about the Railways’ obvious inability to bring maize and other grain quickly enough to the grain elevators. This entails ships lying over for unnecessary long periods of time. From that I want to cross over to harbour and other matters.

I consequently come to the Mdantsane/ East London Bantu traffic which I have already spoken about on more than one occasion in similar debates. The hon. the Minister knows about that. Mdantsane is a Bantu city in the Ciskei, and its population is now already about 150 000. About 25 000 of these people must work in East London. Mdantsane is situated about 14 miles outside East London. The establishment of Mdantsane at the relevant spot was never discussed with the Bantu as such; it was created in terms of Government policy, border area development and in terms of the policy of the removal of the Bantu from the Western Cape. I consequently want to state that I shall never allow myself to be told that the Government’s policy is to establish a Bantu township there which will accommodate a quarter of a million people in the foreseeable future. On top of that an additional 25 000 people are being moved there from Duncanville. I will not be told that the Government will let so many people live 14 miles from the city where they must work without ensuring proper transport for them. The present position is that a contractor is trying to do this with a great number of buses. Do hon. members know what the present situation is? Some of those Bantu stand at the bus stops from 4 o’clock in the morning and sometimes struggle to get on to a bus by six o’clock. Sometimes a Bantu has to change buses three times so that he can be at his place of work in time at 7.30 or 8 o’clock. On how many occasions have I not been in the city and seen a black mass of them standing there from 5 o’clock in the afternoon. Some of them do not get transport before 8 o’clock in the evening. The result is that they only get home at 10 o’clock. It is surely inhuman to think that those people, who must work, because in the East London area, the Transkei and the Ciskei there is an over-abundance of Bantu—there are not only Bantu in the Transkei and the Ciskei, the whole world is full of them; and droves of them are wandering around looking for work; they do not have the opportunity to strike and say they want a different form of transport, otherwise they have lost their bread and butter—who do not have efficient transport facilities, do not have sufficient trains to bring them there quickly. This can surely not be the intention of the Government and the hon. the Minister. The existing station is situated far away from them. It is a far distance to walk and there is no form of transport with which they can get there. They must therefore walk there. The number of existing buses are not nearly adequate, because the company must have a tremendous number of buses if it wants to transport between 20 000 and 25 000 people within a very short space of time on any one day. I now want to appeal to the hon. the Minister once more to have his commission go into this matter again. Firstly, they must find out if it is not possible to double the railway lines further or to build an additional railway line for the suburban trains alone. If that could be done, more trains could run. Secondly, they must investigate whether it is not possible to bring the station closer to the Bantu township, or rather the Bantu city, because it is a much larger city than East London. Within the space of a few years that city will have a population of a quarter of a million people. I know the hon. the Minister is sympathetic to this. I know of the problems he is experiencing, and I know of the two additional train services, one in the morning and one in the evening, which have been introduced, but many of the employers in East London send out their lorries in the mornings for a distance of 14 miles to go and fetch their Bantu workers because even they, with the sympathy they have for their employees, do not see their way clear to letting their workers stand from 4 o’clock in the morning in order to have them at work on time at 8 o’clock. This means additional traffic congestion on the roads, which are already filled with traffic at that time of the morning. I want to give the hon. the Minister the assurance that if he wants a survey of the employers who send out lorries to have their employees fetched, I shall do it for him with pleasure. It would surprise him how many thousands of employees are transported in that fashion. I am making this appeal on behalf of my constituency, and I am doing so out of a feeling of humanitarianism, because I know what these people have to go through. I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to once more give serious attention to this.

Then I want to come to another matter, i.e. the inability of the Railways to feed the grain elevator in East London to such a degree that the ships can be fed. I know of particular cases, because I deal with shipping myself, where ships have lain for as long as 26 days waiting for a load of grain from the grain elevator. The hon. member for Heilbron spoke yesterday of the storage facilities at harbours. There is no problem as far as storage facilities are concerned. I understand that the grain elevator there is one of the biggest grain elevators in the southern hemisphere. It is the grain elevator we are very proud of. This facility in East London, for the shipment of grain, is something that is well utilized at the harbour. If the Railways is not able to get the grain there quickly enough, the hon. the Minister must tell us what is wrong. If it is a question of not being able to fit this into his programme with respect to the number of trains that are running, he must also tell us this. Since the agents deal with the costs that have to be borne for a ship that must remain at anchor outside the harbour, and since we realize how much it could cost the country, I want to allege that it causes difficulties if the grain elevator does not have the grain with which to load a ship. At this stage the grain elevator can fill even the heaviest of ships, which come to load grain, in 24 to 36 hours, if there is grain. If there is no grain, of course, it cannot be done.

This brings me to the harbour itself. As a result of the construction of the harbour, ships cannot enter it in bad weather conditions. This entails additional delays as far as the East London harbour is concerned. It is not for me to say what is being done. The hon. the Minister himself has said that the best thing that can be done is to build a new harbour. The extension of the sea wall would help a great deal, but a new harbour is what East London needs. Then the hon. the Minister says again that the harbour is not being used sufficiently. When I give him the answers and tell him that he must work out the railage to the Witwatersrand so that the harbour can be used to a greater extent, he tells me it is the work of the agents to ensure that the goods reach the harbour at East London. He says it is not his work to do this. That is fair enough, but the fact remains that if the harbour has the capacity to handle the shipping, the harbour certainly can be used to a greater extent.

While I still have a few minutes, I just want to cross over to the question of containerization, which has not been mentioned here yet. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister if our harbours—all of them—have the facilities to handle even that quantity of containerization that is being envisaged at present. I think that the Conference Lines as such have not yet given a verdict or accepted it, but we must nevertheless accept that containerization is already being used throughout the world as far as ships are concerned. One sees this everywhere one travels, and it must also come in South Africa. What are the Minister’s plans in connection with harbour space and quay space when containerization does arrive? I would be grateful if the hon. the Minister could give us a bit of help in that connection.

I still have a minute or two. I now come to the most important matter of all and that is the namesake of the hon. the Minister in East London. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I am just standing up to rectify a matter which was raised yesterday evening by the hon. member for Durban Point. The hon. member lodged a plea here for a group of people who, as he says, are not well-off, and then also for 150 school children who were deprived of transport facilities by the withdrawal of the suburban train service around Bloemfontein. In addition he accused us—i.e. the hon. member for Smithfield and myself—of not having attended a meeting that was arranged for us, of having ignored it. As far as the meeting is concerned, it was on 12th September at 10 o’clock in the office of the System Manager at Bloemfontein. As it happens our National Party Congress was sitting at the time and Mr. Pansegrouw and I were there at 10 o’clock. In the meantime the meeting was postponed without our knowledge. Neither did we know what the new date arranged for the meeting was. My voters and all the people concerned have accepted this at all the various report-back meetings. They are satisfied. But before I now actually speak about the rest of the hon. member’s speech, I just want to mention that as far as I am concerned the speech he made here yesterday evening is so like the speech Mr. Jaap Marais made in my constituency. We know the Hertzogites no longer have a representative here in the House of Assembly. But now they have obtained a new mouthpiece in the person of the hon. member for Durban Point, a good friend who states their case here. We know that during the past election there was also similar co-operation, and here we see that even in the House of Assembly they now have a mouthpiece. I do not know what terminology we will use in this connection.

It was one of your ex-supporters who wrote to me.

But what are the present facts? I just want to say in passing that I have had very little fun really in my political career. All told I have now been in the provincial council and in Parliament for 23 years, but on only two occasions has the United Party had the courage to nominate a candidate there, and I think the progress they made was in the region of 7 votes. Notwithstanding this the Hertzogites only obtained 408 votes.

The withdrawal of the suburban train service in the Bloemfontein area is, of course, a matter we have debated very thoroughly. It is a problem that goes back many years, and it has become worse. In the 1971-’72 financial year the revenue of the suburban trains round Bloemfontein was only on R39 000, while the expenditure amounted to R518 000, a total loss of R479 000 in that one single year.

Why do you not support the train service?

If we wanted to make the train service a paying proposition, and consequently increased the prices of tickets, the increase would have had to be 1 240%. It is correct that a committee was chosen, and we have held discussions with them on several occasions. The members of that committee all agreed that the train services should be withdrawn. However, we tried to retain certain services. In the mornings there are still two trains that transport White passengers, while private transport has also been arranged for the people. As far back as the 13th of February, on behalf of the people there, I made representations to the hon. the Deputy Minister of Transport and he answered me on 23rd February. His secretary wrote as follows (translation):

Now the trains are standing.

I want to conclude by saying that those facilities were created. That hon. member should, therefore, preferably try to come and hold a meeting in Bloemfontein; then we can have a small get-together with him and settle this matter.

Mr. Chairman, my time is extremely limited, and consequently I should like to take the opportunity of just bringing a few local matters to the Minister’s attention. [Interjection.] I would appreciate it very much if I could have as few interjections from that side of the House as possible, because my time is extremely limited.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider very seriously the improvement of the passenger train service between Uitenhage and Port Elizabeth, particularly in the afternoons between two o’clock and five o’clock. Uitenhage is undergoing tremendous industrial development. I want to give the hon. the Minister the assurance that if we can bring about an improvement there, as far as the train service in the afternoon is concerned, such a service will be very well supported. In the same breath I also want to ask the hon. the Minister to give consideration to the replacement of steam locomotives by diesel locomotives on the Port Elizabeth-Uitenhage stretch of line.

Then I want to take the opportunity, on behalf of my voters, of thanking the hon. the Minister for the concessions announced in the Railway Budget as far as railway pensioners are concerned. Today there are 22 363 railway pensioners receiving allowances. There are also 14 769 widows. Taking into consideration that the temporary allowance was fixed on 1st April, 1964, at R35 per month in the case of married people and R15 per month in the case of unmarried people, I want to ask the hon. the Minister if the time has not possibly come to bring about an improvement there as well. I can just point out that the surplus in that fund amounted to R612,4 million on 31st March, 1972. I would particularly appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would consider that matter.

In conclusion I just briefly want to refer to the Benevolent Fund. This Fund was called into being, for the purpose of granting assistance to the railway servants, ex-servants and next of kin of deceased servants who are in destitute circumstances, by way of grants and by way of granting servants rent-free loans. I would appreciate it very much if the Minister would consider increasing the amounts paid from the departmental Benevolent Fund to widows and dependants. I understand that quite a number of years ago an improvement was effected in that connection. I would, however, particularly appreciate it if the hon. the Minister would again consider the matter. It would help those people, who sometimes live under difficult financial conditions, to fend for themselves. We appreciate the increases which the Minister announced, but I would appreciate it very much if the widows, in that specific connection, were to receive the necessary attention.

Mr. Chairman, I was privileged last night to travel in the early hours of the morning back to Cape Town in the Blue Train and I would like to congratulate the hon. the Minister and all those people who are responsible for providing us with this train on the standard and excellent service that is now available to us in South Africa, to say nothing of tourists who must be impressed with this magnificent train.

Then I should like to refer to a train that is not so magnificent, namely the train that runs between Johannesburg and Nelspruit which takes tourists down to the Kruger National Park. Its standard is not high in any respect and in addition to that, tourists going to Skukuza have to change trains at Nelspruit station. I wonder whether he would look into this matter. It is a matter which affects this image of our tourist industry quite considerably.

From time to time I have raised the question of facilities on the southern suburbs lines in the Peninsula. I do not do it every year but I find it necessary again to refer to this matter this year. There has been considerable residential development in the southern suburbs during the last 20 years. I am acquainted with this line and have been travelling it myself since 1936. Residential development has increased, particularly with additional houses being provided for the Navy and the dockyard by local authorities in that area. There is as the hon. the Minister may know considerable traffic congestion for the dockyard workers going down to Simonstown in the morning and coming from Simonstown in the evening. He will also be aware of the fact that the roads in that area are hopelessly narrow; too narrow and inadequate. I would at this stage like to appeal to him to give his personal attention to the possibility of the Railways making available to the local municipality the surplus railway land, along the main road, particularly between Muizenberg and Fish Hoek—to provide off street parking. I have referred to this matter several times. I have been to see the City Council about it; I have been to see the Railways about it. It seems to me that the buck is being passed from the Railways to the City Council and vice versa, and no finality is being obtained. I ask him please to intervene and to give this matter his attention. It is the only road that leads to the naval base and the dockyard at Simonstown.

Then I want to deal briefly with the adequacy of peak hour services. I have here a time-table which was issued in 1953, that is 20 years ago. If you look at the morning service you will see that from Fish Hoek, for example, there were six trains to Cape Town, all of them express. At the moment we have 10 trains from Fish Hoek over the peak hour period which I would say is probably from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and only five of them are express. That service is in fact not adequate for the numbers of people that are now coming to live in our area. Then I refer to the return service in the afternoon. Here I would say the peak hour period is probably from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. In 1953 there were seven trains and all of them were express to the southern suburbs, to a greater or a lesser extent. Today there are 11 trains, which is an improvement, but the number of stations that they do not stop at seems to have been reduced and the service is certainly not as quick as is required to take people from the City to the southern suburbs.

Then, Mr. Chairman, I want to deal with the question of a late afternoon service mainly for the dockyard in Simonstown. In 1953 there were, I think, five trains from Simonstown over the peak hour period. Now there are still five trains. In 1953 three of those trains were express and now none of those trains is express. As a result there are more and more people working in the Navy and in the dockyard who are using motor-cars and arranging lift services. The situation is increasingly difficult and I would ask the hon. the Minister please to look at it.

I now come to services during the day. There are many trains that leave Cape Town for the southern suburbs or that come from the southern suburbs to Cape Town, which have eight carriages. I wonder whether he has not thought of the possibility of four-carriage trains being used on these services during the non-peak hours when the trains are inevitably empty. I would commend that to him for his consideration. I would also ask him to give consideration to the reinstitution of a fast lunch-hour service from Cape Town to the southern suburbs and, alternatively, from the southern suburbs to Cape Town. Such a service is necessary, particularly for women who wish to do shopping in the morning or alternatively in the afternoons.

Then, Mr. Chairman, I must again bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister the question of the jolting and jarring of the suburban trains. They are absolutely shocking. Each year when I have raised the matter here in Parliament he has said that the matter is being looked into and that there is the possibility of a better drawing mechanism being instituted. I can only tell him that the improvement is very limited, if it exists at all. It is a most uncomfortable service, and it is particularly awkward for elderly people who use trains. The jolting and the jarring of the trains is an absolutely shocking disgrace.

I want to conclude by referring to the cleanliness both of the trains and of the stations. Letters appear from time to time in the papers; I am not going to quote these, but I can tell him from my own observations that the interior of the suburban trains is not clean. It certainly leaves a lot to be desired. As regards the exterior, I see in reply to a letter in the paper that his department said the other day that they are going to have some sort of shampoo service for the exteriors of these trains. I do not know whether that service has been started or not, but the exterior of the trains is certainly dirty and grubby and the windows are grimy. The shelters also are in a bad condition, and the cloakrooms and the toilets for women and for men which I have seen from time to time, are very often in a disgusting state.

The question of subways is constantly being brought to the attention of the railway authorities. They are dirty and they are unhygienic. There are broken bottles lying in them and they are often used as urinals. I ask the hon. the Minister to look into this matter. I ask him particularly to see whether it is possible for more Railway Police to be made available on the suburban line. I cannot remember when I last saw anybody in a Railway Police uniform operating on the southern suburbs line.

The question of pupil concessions will, I am sure, have been raised by other members on this side of the House while I was away the last couple of days, but I must say that this is a real hardship on people who have pupils travelling on the suburban line to schools. They have found themselves having to cope with a 150% increase for those pupils aged between 12 and 16. In addition I wonder whether consideration cannot be given to the restoration of the half-fare age to 16 instead of 12. There are many young children who leave school at the age of 16, but there are probably not many who leave school between the ages of 12 and 16, and I think we can make out a case for concession facilities to be granted to children up to the age of 16 and not up to the age of 12 only.

Then I would like to conclude by saying that we have a problem at Kalk Bay harbour—an old, old problem—that I want to bring to the Minister’s attention once again, and that is that the railway gates open comparatively late in the morning and close at 5.15 in the afternoon. This means that a number of, both professional fishermen and also local amateur fishermen, have to get their cars out of the habour at Kalk Bay before five o’clock in the afternoon, which is an unnecessary hardship. Consequently I ask the hon. the Minister to consider whether it is not possible to put a flagman on duty in the evening at the gate leading to the harbour. The bridge to the harbour, which is either to be built by the Railways or by the municipality—I am not sure which—gives cause for considerable local concern. I believe that the siting of the bridge is completely wrong. The type of bridge that is envisaged is, I think, unnecessarily large for that particular area. I believe that alternative suggestions can be made and a better plan put into operation.

Is that a pedestrian bridge?

This is a vehicle bridge, an access bridge to Kalk Bay harbour. It is a monstrous thing that they are planning at the moment. As I know the area, it is completely unsuitable and badly sited. If the Minister would like to make some of his departmental officials available to me, I will go with them and show them what I think could be alternative sites, in collaboration with the municipal officials.

Sir, I want to deviate a little from the normal. I do not want to bother the hon. the Minister by making representations regarding anything in my constituency. I want to dwell once more on the question of our high-rated traffic. I think that it is generally accepted and that we all admit to the fact that high-rated traffic forms the backbone of the revenue of our Railways. In the course of this debate many hon. members referred to the importance of high-rated traffic and pointed out what effect it had on the Revenue Account. One is particularly grateful for the fact that the latest adjustments in our rates have caused a narrowing of the gap between tariffs on low-rated traffic and high-rated traffic, which was partly what the Schumann Commission and the Marais Commission recommended. We all admit—and it is a fact—that an increase in high-rated traffic makes a substantial and serious impact on one’s Revenue Account. Sir, when it was in the interests of South Africa, when it was in the interests of the State, when it was in the interests of the economy to introduce import control, the result was that Railway revenue was curbed, and the Railways in fact had to bear the loss in the interests of the State because certain articles were placed on the list of articles which were subject to import control. We all know that imported articles and manufactured articles constitute the high-rated traffic. I think it is very important to test the sensitivity South African Railways as far as revenue is concerned, particularly when there is a drop in his high-rated traffic. Sir, we can test this very easily, and in order to do this I want to refer to the results of working for the financial year 1970-’71 and for the financial year 1971-’72. There we shall see how a minor variation in high-rated traffic can affect the revenue of the Railways. Sir, if you look at the annual report for 1970-’71—and now I am referring specifically to the Railway section—then you will find that there was a loss of R66½ million for that year. If we look at the following financial year, 1971-’72, we find that there was a loss of R82 million. In other words, between those two years of working there was a difference of approximately R16 million. To what may this difference be ascribed? If we look at the same two years and draw a comparison between the percentages from high-rated traffic formed of the total traffic revenue in those years, then we find that in the year 1971-’72 high-rated traffic formed 16½% to 171½% of the traffic revenue, and the following year, when the gap was widened by R16 million, the percentage varied between plus/minus 16½% and 17%. In other words, there was a difference of 1% in the percentage of high-rated traffic in those two years of working. Looking at the graph, we find that for the first four months of those two years the revenue from high-rated traffic expressed as a percentage was the same. That means that over a period of eight months one had the effect that a change in the high-rated traffic of 1% caused a loss of plus/minus R16 million. That shows how sensitive the Railways are as far as high-rated traffic is concerned. The hon. member for East London North, who kicked up such a fuss about the high tariffs on agricultural products, is not here now. He also spoke about livestock. I ask for how long must the Railways, which is a commercial undertaking too, still carry that sector of the country? I think the time has come for them to stand on their own feet.

Farmer haters!

I have already mentioned this and we also realize that a minor adjustment to the high-rated traffic, a minor adjustment in the gap between high-rated and low-rated traffic will easily solve the problem for us.

Even the increase in consumer prices is being linked to the Railways because of tariff adjustments. That is a complete exaggeration. What is the real effect? Mealiemeal rose by 1,78% because of Railway rates, coffee by ,35% and potatoes by 1,3%. The dealers are largely responsible for these price increases, because they hide behind the Railways. I think the time has arrived for something to be done to curb the activities of those people who, every time there is a tariff adjustment, use it for their own ends. They are the culprits.

I made a brief reference to import control and indicated what effect it had on our revenue. When we look at Government Notice No. 1989 of 30th November, 1972, we find a number of the commodities which have now been exempted from import control and we find, inter alia, wooden tools, brooms, brush bodies, natural cork in block form, stoves, ranges, grids, diamond cutting tools, aircraft engines and parts, outboard engines and parts, propulsion engines for ships and boats, motor cycle engines and parts, locomotives and parts and gas turbines—all of them commodities which have now been exempted. I believe that the exemption of these articles will cause us to find that high-rated traffic will in fact increase with the result that the gap which exists will be narrowed and we shall once again obtain the necessary revenue.

I should now like to return to the handling of certain empty containers. I want to use this example. If one should send a crate of fowls from Komga to Alice, it must be transferred at Blaney and again at Amabele and the crate of fowls eventually arrives in Alice. There is a tariff for that. But if one then returns the empty crate and attaches to it a statement reading that the crate was full originally and that one was returning it, then the crate returns along the same route and it again has to be transferred at all those places. It takes two people to unload and reload the empty crate and it takes the same space in the truck, but it goes at a much cheaper rate. I want to plead for the elimination of those anomalies.

Hon. members often tend to refer to the pipelines and the profit made on them which is being used to offset losses. But what about all those years when thousands upon thousands of empty petrol and oil drums were returned at that cheap rate, when there were no pipelines. Then the other sectors of the Railways had to provide that revenue. Why may the pipelines not do so now? So what grounds are there for that argument? If it was borne by another commodity in those days, then the pipelines may just as well do so today. I want to plead that we should think about eliminating this kind of anomaly, because sometimes it would be cheaper to pay out the consignor on the other side for that crate rather than to return it by rail.

Mr. Chairman, I have a few items which I wish to bring to the notice of the hon. the Minister. We have just had a friend here from England who does a lot of travelling all over the world. She asked me to congratulate the hon. the Minister on the Blue Train which she had used. She definitely thinks that it is the number one train the whole world as the hon. the Minister said the other day. Another thing she mentioned was that there were several passengers from the mail boat in Durban who wished to join the luxury bus which operates between Durban and Cape Town via the Garden Route. They could not get on the bus because it was full. I believe that this is one of the two bus routes which really pay. The other one is the luxury bus route from Johannesburg via the Drakensberg to Durban. I do think that if these bus routes are becoming so popular we should run an extra bus along those routes.

I should like to support the hon. member for Yeoville regarding the Sishen/Saldanha Bay railway line. A request was made yesterday that the line should be doubled. I do not want to interfere with the area of the hon. member who made that request. To a certain extent I agree with him, but I think it was quite absurd to make such a request. When a railway line is there, surely it can be used for the purposes of the mines as well as those of the farmers and the commercial houses. I am quite certain that the hon. the Minister will not consider burdening the country with another railway line. As I say, I support the idea of the line from Sishen to Saldanha Bay and the Saldanha complex. I think it is a very wonderful thing and I am sure that it will be of great use financially to the country.

I want to refer to the development at Napierville, my old hobbyhorse. I am very happy to report that the famous Charlie Malan Hall has now been removed. I tried for 12 years to have that old landmark removed because I considered it the most dangerous traffic hazard in the town. I am very glad to see that it has gone. I should like to learn how far the development has progressed to enable the City Council of Pietermaritzburg to take over Napierville. I see that a lot of new houses are being built. With that alone I think that a second exit is urgently required in that complex.

Finally I should like to thank the General Manager and his staff for the very wonderful job under very trying circumstances they have done during the year for South Africa and for us.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to discuss with the hon. the Minister something which must be of some concern to him. I refer to the effect which the increased dock and cranage charges which are now being levied on our harbours is having on the passing ship traffic and upon our repair and engineering companies both in Cape Town and Durban. The golden harvests of ship duties which reached South Africa as a result of the closing of the Suez Canal obviously had a tremendous impact on the revenue of the Railways. In fact, I see that the harbour profits are being used largely to subsidize losses of sections of the Railways and Airways. It has come to my notice that, as a result of these increased charges, the engineering firms in Cape Town and Durban are now distressed to find that the routine overhauls—not the emergency overhauls, but the routine overhauls—to the large super tankers and other large ore carriers are now being routed to Lisnave, the large dry dock complex in Portugal. We are losing this business. Only recently it was reported that the ship repair firms having quoted for repair jobs, received a cable reading as follows:

I am sure that the hon. the Minister does not desire to lose the revenue which is accruing to his harbour department, nor do our engineering shops which are dependent upon these jobs in order to create considerable job employment opportunities, desire this, nor on the other hand does it encourage the use of South African materials and repairs. Generally, it does not improve our image as a haven for ships in trouble. It may be that the Suez Canal will not always remain closed and the excellent reputation which our harbours have acquired is now being threatened.

Then I want to raise the hardy annual of why it is that our drydocks in Cape Town never seem to be able to make a profit, however busy they are. In the case of the old drydock, which is over 100 years old, even though it is occupied for 365 days in the year it does not show a profit because of our peculiar and almost archaic system of accounting at Railway headquarters. It also has to carry a very heavy accounting depreciation factor although the stone and the mortar in that dock has certainly been written off over the passage of time.

Finally, we have had a compliment paid to us about our Blue Train and we are operating an excellent airways service. However, I heard the comment only this week by a group of surgeons who are visiting South Africa that their aircraft had no sooner taken off from London than they had their first bottle of South African wine. They complimented our country and industry very highly but unfortunately they ran out of wine.

Oh, that is a tragedy!

It was a hard night to sit on the aeroplane from London to South Africa and not be served your favourite wine.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to touch on a matter which may sound trifling and unimportant. I should like to thank the Minister and the Management most sincerely for supplying plastic bags in the compartments of long-distance trains. The passengers may deposit peels, paper and other waste materials in these bags. These bags are then emptied by the bedding attendants and placed in larger plastic bags. These are emptied at the large railway stations. I also want to say that the Trans-Karoo in which we travelled down to Cape Town from Pretoria for the session looked cleaner than it has ever done before in all the time that I have been making use of this service. It also results in much less pollution occurring along the railway lines. Previously it was the practice simply to throw the rubbish to the railway line. Now this has been eliminated. I have presented pleas in regard to this matter on a number of occasions and I would like to thank the hon. the Minister and the Administration again, and I want to do this on behalf of other train users, because this pollution will be eliminated in the future.

Then I would like to touch on a matter to which the hon. member for Vanderbijlpark also referred. It is in connection with the pipeline. During the past three or four years, the hon. members of the Opposition have objected, particularly through the hon. member for Yeoville during the Railway Budget debate, to the utilization of the profits of the pipeline to help square the Railway balance sheet. The objection, as hon. members already know, is that the motorists of a small part of the Republic, the Vereeniging / Witwatersrand / Pretoria area, have to subsidize the rest of the Republic of South Africa as far as transport is concerned. On another occasion the hon. member also expanded this area and said that the areas bordering on that complex, namely the South-eastern Transvaal and the Northern Free State should also be included. But however far he would like to expand this area, I should like to bring a few facts to the attention of hon. members. As far as the region affected by the increased rates is concerned, it must be admitted that this is the most densely populated part of the Republic of South Africa. The biggest concentration of our White population is in that area. I estimate that they represent about 35% to 40% of the White population of South Africa. Then one must also consider the large non-White population of that area. My first question to the Opposition in this connection is: What was the primary aim of the construction of that pipeline? My own answer to that is that it was to bring relief to the heavy railway traffic from the coast, particularly from the harbour of Durban. If the pipeline had not been built, motorists in this complex would in any case have to pay higher railage rates. As far as I know, it was agreed that the pipeline rates would not be higher than the rates would have been if railage of fuel had continued. Now the Opposition asks that the motorists concerned should have the benefit of the utilization of this pipeline. What is the Opposition really asking for? I should like the Opposition to say whether they differ with me. They are requesting that the motorists concerned should be subsidized by an amount representing the difference between the railage cost and the present cost of transport via the pipeline. In other words, whereas they maintain that the motorists in that region are subsidizing the public, they are now asking that the public in general should subsidize that group of motorists. I am also one of the motorists who fall within that region. The pipeline was built by the South African Railways from and by means of the capital of the South African Railways. It is obvious that the Management must apply the profits from it to the benefit of the entire industry. After all, that is a pure and simple business principle. If the Minister has to relinquish those profits on the pipeline, they will have to be recovered from another source. The Opposition says that they should be recovered from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. But that Fund does not come from nowhere; it has to be supplemented by means of taxation. The Opposition members must please tell us where these funds must come from. Must they come from increased income tax, must they come from increased sales tax, must they be obtained from increased company tax? From which source must they come?

Mr. Chairman, I just want to raise two minor matters. These matters may sound trifling, yet they concern a great many people. In this debate we have heard about the sympathetic heart of the Railways towards its staff; we have heard that the Railways mean well with these people, but that it is a question of cost. We realize that there is such a thing as the cost factor and that one cannot merely raise prices and salaries as one likes. However, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister this afternoon for a privilege for what I call the “railway widow”, a privilege which will cost the Railways absolutely nothing. I have previously mentioned to the hon. the Minister certain concessions which exist in respect of the railway pensioner and his wife. The hon. the Minister then thought fit to quote the regulations to me again, by way of an answer. I just want to sum them up again for him. I am only concerned about one matter. We have the strange situation that when a railwayman goes on pension, he and his wife enjoy, among other things, 48 quarter-price concessions. They also get other concessions but the moment the man dies and his wife remains behind as a widow, the 48 quarter-price concessions immediately drop to 12. I would like to put it that these concessions, particularly to the elderly pensioner and his wife, are a tremendous privilege. When they live in the suburbs and want to come into town, it is a tremendous convenience and a tremendous help for them when we take today’s high transport costs into account. I am simply unable to believe that a situation could arise where it would be necessary for the Minister to arrange an extra carriage, let alone an extra train, to convey a few pensioners, a few widows, when they come to the city. I want to make a very serious request to the hon. the Minister to grant the same concessions to widows as those they had when their husbands were still alive. It would not cost the Railways a single cent, but it would be a major concession for the widow of the railwayman, and I request the Minister to please do this, particularly in view of the expenses of these people.

The second matter which I would like to mention, are the subways to which the hon. member for Simonstown also referred. I have quite a number of these subways in my constituency and not one of them is ever really clean. The lighting is always weak, if there is any lighting at all; and they are used by people of all colours and odours. I know of conditions in my own constituency where a lady literally risks her life by using a subway at night. The hon. the Minister previously built a fly-over bridge at Maitland, after I pointed out the problems to him.

However, whenever these problems concerning subways arise and one tries to remedy the matter, one constantly comes up against the fact that subways are controlled by the municipalities concerned. I believe that the matter cannot be left as it is. The condition of subways reflects on the Railways and on the stations. I believe that the hon. the Minister must put his foot down and say that wherever there is a subway, he will take over control. He must say: I shall ensure that they are controlled; I shall ensure that they are in good condition; I shall ensure that people are safe there. Secondly, I am no believer in subways. I believe that we here in the Peninsula live under conditions which make it better to make use of fly-over bridges. I would like to request the Minister that where new lines are being built he must do away with the construction of subways and rather build fly-over bridges for passengers.

Lastly I cannot but express my deep disappointment at the fact that the hon. the Minister is now washing his hands of the Sishen-Saldanha scheme. This is a scheme which gripped the imagination of thousands of people. It was an imaginative scheme which would have been of great value for thousands, particularly here in the Western Cape. I still recall how the hon. member for Moorreesburg spoke about the wonderful growth points which could be created at Saldanha. We thought that extra industries would be established here. We thought that the potential of the North-West would be developed. Now, however, to my sorrow, I understand that the hon. the Minister of Transport has left this matter to Iscor. I do not think that this is good enough. I read that the Minister said in his Budget speech that if certain conditions develop and it becomes general policy, he will be prepared to take over that line on certain conditions. I think that the hon. the Minister must take us into his confidence. It is a matter of tremendous scope and possibilities, and I would like to know from the Minister what the conditions are which would have to develop before he would take over the line and the conditions which he agreed with Iscor, under which he would take over the railway line.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to avail myself of this opportunity to break a lance for the crane drivers at our harbours. This is a group of people who do hard work, but at present there is widespread dissatisfaction among them as a result of certain time limits which have now been introduced at the harbours. It used to be a standard procedure that drivers were allowed 15 minutes from the time they arrived at the check in point in order to get to their cranes. Certain cables have to be either hoisted or lowered and the cranes have to be switched on. These 15 minutes which were previously at the disposal of the crane drivers, have now been taken away from them. That has been the complaint of all the crane drivers to whom I have spoken. I want to ask the hon. the Minister that these 15 minutes be returned to them. These are people who perform a very strenuous service for the Railways. They work almost day and night, and overtime on Sundays. They must always, no matter what the weather conditions may be, whether the wind is blowing or whatever the case may be, be prepared to do their work and put everything at the disposal of the Railways. I believe that we should look after those people and that we should eliminate the dissatisfaction which exists in Port Elizabeth. These people were previously entitled to it and they have always been granted a quarter of an hour for that specific purpose. Besides that, they were also granted a quarter of an hour when they arrived at their check out point. That time has now been taken away from them. It amounts to this, that those people lose half an hour every day while they are in fact in the service of the Railways.

I think it is high time we gave some attention to the consulting rooms of our railway doctors. I do not think that we should let them deteriorate as is happening at present. The appearance of many of the consulting rooms of our railway doctors is really unsatisfactory. They look more like an uncared-for kitchen. I received personal complaints and went to investigate what was going on there. I could not believe my eyes that a person who believes in health and is aware that germs should be combated, could work in consulting rooms like that. The chairs were rickety. The curtains were so moth-eaten that one could not tell the colour. These are after all the people who ought to display cleanliness. They have to set an example to others. The railwaymen have no other choice but to sit jam-packed in these consulting rooms, waiting from morning to night. Appointments cannot be arranged beforehand. Nor is it always possible for a railwayman to arrange appointments beforehand. I want to ask the hon. Minister to see to it that our railway doctors are given attractive consulting rooms where they can receive patients. I think the railwayman is entitled to that.

But you people say it is the best scheme in the country.

I should like to address a friendly appeal to the hon. the Minister. We are now concerned with the position as it exists in Port Elizabeth. I would be obliged if this subsidiary debate between the hon. member for Durban Point and my other hon. friend could cease now. If the hon. member wants to take over, I shall sit down and give him an opportunity to make a speech. I am making representations to the hon. the Minister. The hon. member is hindering me in my task here.

Nowadays countries all over the world are combating atmospheric pollution. I do not at this stage want to speak about the ore dust pollution at Port Elizabeth in particular. But I think that the hon. the Minister could help us by ensuring that the shunting at the harbour is done by diesel locomotives. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to remove the black smoke locomotives running from New Brighton to the city. The railway line runs parallel to the main street. The black smoke locomotives from New Brighton to the station are busy shunting from morning to night. Those trains cause atmospheric pollution on a scale which is quite unequalled in Port Elizabeth. It would be a great help to our city if the hon. Minister could remove those trains. I do not believe that we are asking too much. I am in earnest when I ask for this, and I hope that the hon. Minister will be able to accommodate us. It would also help a great deal if all the passenger trains could be drawn by diesel engines.

Then I would like to associate myself with the hon. member for Walmer who mentioned a holiday train yesterday. However, I would like to go a little further. I do not want to ask for a holiday train but I do want to ask for a luxury train for Port Elizabeth. Port Elizabeth is entitled to and can lay claim to being part of the tourist industry of South Africa. We should also get what Cape Town has, even though it may not be so luxurious. If Durban can get it, then, after all, Port Elizabeth can also get it. After all. Port Elizabeth has much better members of Parliament than Durban. Just look at the confusion they cause. They have even caused confusion in their own party. The hon. member for Florida said last night that there was unity in his party. He is fibbing, Mr. Chairman; there is strife in their party.

Now I would like to ask the hon. the Minister: Give us a luxury train too, even though it only comes to Port Elizabeth once a week or once in 15 days, so that the people of the north may also have the privilege of enjoying the magnificent weather which one has in Port Elizabeth at this time of the year. The summers there are magnificent, and visitors may also make use of our beaches there. In Port Elizabeth, for example, we do not have sharks as they have in Durban … [Interjections.]

But there are political sharks.

Yes, there are political sharks too. I want to make an appeal to the hon. the Minister to help us in this connection.

Mr. Chairman, paging through the Brown Book, I notice that once again very little money is being spent on the East London harbour. This seems to happen year after year. In fact, the only amount of consequence to be spent in that harbour is an amount of R328 100 for the widening of the entrance channel. I notice too that a small amount of R157 000 is being spent on extensions to the offices of the port captain and the signal station. This I welcome. It is very important that these offices should be improved. At the moment they are quite inadequate for the port captain and the signal station. I am indeed pleased to see that something is being done in this regard.

I want to refer also to the dry dock at East London. The hon. member for Cape Town Gardens earlier on mentioned the dry dock here in Cape Town. The dry dock in East London is so seldom used and I believe that more traffic should be diverted to the East London dry dock. It is very seldom, when I pass by there, that I see a ship in dry dock. I appeal to the hon. the Minister and the department to do their best to divert more traffic to East London’s dry dock.

I refer now to Item No. 1179 in the Brown Book. I am left rather puzzled here, because I notice that in Durban harbour the dredgers Algoa and Springbok are to be replaced by a dredger equipped with grab and suction apparatus. Now I wonder whether this is not the dredger J. F. Craig. If I am correct and this is the J. F. Craig, I want to point out that already R1 072 000 has been spent on it, and I believe it would be a great mistake to spend any more money on it. From the little I know about it, I believe it would be wrong to spend more money on this project. As I have said, an amount of R1 072 000 has already been spent on it, and another R40 000 is still to be spent on it. This particular craft, the J. F. Craig, has a grab crane and a small suction pump, and both are quite inadequate. If the crane goes out of order, the whole craft will come to a standstill and will be completely useless. In fact, I would go so far as to say that when it comes to shipping and dredgers, the J. F. Craig is nothing but a toy. Assuming that this is the J. F. Craig, I wonder whether the hon. the Minister is satisfied with the position. I would like to hear his views on this matter. I believe that we should rather have a suction dredger. Let us rather spend money on a suction dredger or a grab dredger.

If you read the item, you will see that these two dredgers are being replaced by a grab and suction dredger.

Yes, I have read the item, but I am afraid that it is the J. F. Craig that is going to be equipped as described here.

But the J. F. Craig is not a grab and suction dredger.

No, but is it not being converted to one? This is what I am worried about.

It is not being converted. These dredgers are being replaced.

Well, I should like to hear the hon. the Minister’s views on this matter.

Another item dealing with the East London harbour which concerns me is the 25% harbour charges rebate. Here I want to plead with the Minister for the extension of this 25% harbour charges rebate for the East London harbour. This was originally granted as a growth-point incentive to coastwise sea traffic only and to export shipments from the East London port. I know that the Driesen Commission was sympathetic towards this rebate but I am not happy with the position as it is at the moment and I appeal to the Minister seriously to consider extending this rebate in our harbour. It is very important, particularly when we are doing all we can to further industrial development in that area.

Sir, I rise to offer my apologies to the hon. the Minister for not having been in the House yesterday when he replied to my request for more use to be made of the psychologists and sociologists of the Railways when these people could render assistance to families hit by train accidents. I have already extended my personal apologies to the hon. the Minister and I have explained my absence from the House.

Sir, I should also briefly like to bring two other matters to the Minister’s attention. The first deals with the old Blue Train over the Drakensberg. Sir, I am expressing this idea not only with a view to the more efficient use of this train, but also with a view to greater convenience for the public. At present this train is being used between the Witwatersrand and Durban. I believe the train can also be used efficiently on the route between Durban and Cape Town—the same route the Orange Express uses—because the Karoo area particularly lends itself to a train with the air conditioning facilities that this train offers. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider not terminating this train’s route at Durban, but also using the train from Durban through the Karoo to Cape Town and then back again. I believe such a two-way journey can be squeezed into a period of one week.

Then, lastly Mr. Chairman, we have appreciatively taken note of the expansion of the railway colleges at Esselen Park and Kaalfontein, and also of the branches that have already been established at Bellville, Bloemfontein. Germiston, Koedoespoort, Port Elizabeth and Wentworth. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider the request of opening a branch at Bethlehem as well. I believe that Bethlehem, which is at present a reasonably large railway centre, would successfully make use of such a privilege. But then, in all humility, I should also like to ask the hon. the Minister this: We in Bethlehem, and particularly the railway officials of Bethlehem, desire to honour my predecessor, who in his lifetime was chairman of the Select Committee on Railways and Harbours, the late Mr. Gideon Knobel, by some gesture specifically attached to South African Railways, and if it is possible we should very much like such a college or branch of a college to be named after the late Uncle Gideon. If this is not possible, we would be glad if the hon. the Minister could suggest something else, which would bear special witness to railway service, to do honour to the late Mr. Knobel.

Mr. Chairman, in the dying moments of this debate, to use football terminology, I should like, very briefly, to put a few small matters to the hon. the Minister on behalf of my constituency. The first I want to mention is the planned, proposed railway station at Water-valboven. I want to make a friendly request that this service, if it is possible, should be implemented as quickly as possible, bearing in mind indirectly, too, that the Herstigtes are making things a little difficult for me.

The other aspect I want to mention is that particularly as the Broodsnyersplaas-Ermelo railway line is now progressing, and bearing in mind the development that is taking place there, and in conjunction the expansion in railway activities and the shifting of the related goods shed, I want to ask that consideration also be given to establishing a new passenger station for Ermelo in the course of time.

In conclusion I just want to mention that at times in the past the idea has already been raised about the extension of our railway line to Swaziland. I do not want to advocate this idea now, but I do want to link it to the fact that the Swazi homeland is now coming into being there, and I think that at some time or other thought will have to be given to trying to establish the necessary service and the necessary infrastructure to link up with that, and, with a view to that, this idea perhaps has some merit. I can just say that there are three points from which it can be extended, from Carolina on the northern side, possibly from Breyten in the central area, or from the Lothair siding that already exists. Those are all the matters that I kindly wanted to bring to the hon. the Minister’s attention.

The hon. members for Bethlehem and Ermelo made me think very much of two Olivers asking for more. In this case I want to make it clear that this is an Oliver asking for less. I want to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to what has been happening in the field of railway fares over the last two years. He will remember that two years ago I raised the whole question of what he had referred to in his Budget speech as the rationalization of railway fares following metrication and of course he told us at the time that the Railways had also found it necessary to put up fares by 10%. Now, when I examined what had actually happened with this so-called rationalization and the increase of 10%, I came to the conclusion that the Railways had used some rather extraordinary arithmetic; because we found that fares had in fact risen very steeply, especially surburban line fares, so steeply that in one case the fares rose not by 10% but by something like 130%. When I spoke two years ago I gave some details of how suburban fares in particular had been affected and how the increases had affected main line fares. I want to come back to some of the examples I used then to show exactly what has happened in this period between the hon. the Minister’s Budget speech two years ago and now. Starting with some of the suburban fares, two years ago it was announced that the cost of a single journey between Pinelands and Cape Town was going up from 10 cents to 18 cents. This was the 10% increase. In fact it was 80%. The single fare from Southfield to Cape Town rose from 23 cents to 31 cents, and that from Rondebosch to Cape Town from 11 cents to 17 cents. That 17 cents for the single fare, of course, made it one cent more than the old return fare which applied in March, 1971. The return fare from Rondebosch to Cape Town rose from 16 cents to 21 cents. Among these rises that I have just mentioned to you, these 10% rises, the biggest rise in fact was 80%, which is a far cry from the 10% announced by the Minister in his Budget. Return fares were not affected so drastically although they had gone up by quite a considerable amount. The Railways’ 10% arithmetic had put up the return fare from Pinelands to Cape Town from 17c to 22c. This is, in fact, a rise of something like 29%. Anyway, I suppose it could be argued that 29% is quite a lot closer to 10% than 80 is. So, the people of Pinelands should have been fairly grateful. What has happened now? We had another round of fare increases at the beginning of this year. Let me say that this occurred only 21 months after the increases of 1971. What happened then, of course, was that whereas railway users had been given a left punch to the head in 1971, the hon. the Minister and the Railways Administration were dealing out a pretty hefty right punch to the head, this time forcing up fares far higher than ever before.

Let us have a look at some of these fares as they now stand. Before April, 1971, the return fare to Rondebosch stood at 16c. As I have said, it was put up from 16c to 21c, but what happened at the beginning of this year? It was then put up to 25c. An increase within 21 months of 56% in the fare I suggest is a shocking state of affairs. Let us look at another one of the fares that I quoted two years ago, the South-field-Cape Town fare. The return fare was originally 32c. With the 10% increase it went up from 32c to 39c. What is it now? Where it was 32c two years ago, it is now 47c. That, oddly enough, is an increase of 47% on the old fare; all, let me stress, within 21 months.

It is all done by computer.

Let us take the third example that I quoted two years ago, the Pinelands-Cape Town fare. I do not know what the hon. the Minister has against the people of Pinelands, but it is something very serious. You see, their return fare was 17c. That went up to 22c. But now, what do we find? It is up by a total of 9c. in 21 months to 26c. That is an increase of 53%. These are just some random examples of the sort of increases that have hit the normal suburban commuter. It does not end there. We only have to look at the startling rise in main line passenger fares since two years ago to see that all railway users have been hit and hit very hard indeed. Whatever arguments the hon. the Minister might raise, he must concede one thing and that is that transport, suburban transport and main line transport, is a very real factor in the lives of our ordinary working people. Let us look at some of the main line fares. In the two years since 1971 the first-class return fare from Cape Town to Johannesburg has risen from R44-36 to R61-10. I have not worked out the percentage, but it must be a very interesting one. The second-class return fare has risen from R29-58 to R40-74. Second-class, as we all know, is used by people who do not have money to throw around. Let us take other fares. Again I have not chosen them with any great care; I have simply taken them at random. I am quite certain that we can find far worse examples if we burrow through the Railways fare-book. Let us take the Durban to Cape Town fare. In March, 1971, the first-class return fare to Durban was R53-62, but what is it now? It is nearly R20 more. It is now R72-43. The second-class return fare has risen from R35-75 to R48-29. It seems clear to me that something terrible has happened in the Railways Administration since 1971. I say this because hon. members will recall that when I questioned this whole business of fares at the time, and indeed if one looks at the hon. the Minister’s Budget speech, he argued that it had been necessary not only to adjust fares through what he called rationalization, but he felt that in some cases—and it was mentioned particularly that suburban fares were a case in point—these fares were not economical. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Constantia asked for certain concessions on both the railway and air services for certain retarded scholars. In regard to rail concessions, I can give him the following information:

Rail concessions are available to all scholars and students travelling from home to and from school;

Aged 12 and over—ordinary single fare plus 20% for the return journey;

Aged under 12 years—half ordinary single fare plus 20% for the return journey.

I am afraid that I cannot accede to the request for concessions on air services. There are many deserving cases and many requests have been received. You cannot possibly confine concessions to one particular group. There are, for instance, spastic children who are in the same physical and mental condition as these retarded children the hon. member referred to. As a matter of fact, I know that there is a school for spastic children which is run by the Roman Catholic Church and which is situated close to the D. F. Malan Airport. The hon. member has probably seen it, it is a round building just before you turn off to the airport. Many of these schools have spastic children who are in a very bad physical and mental condition. There are other deserving cases as well, such as polio sufferers, for example. We make no concessions on the air services at all, and I cannot make an exception for one particular group of persons; I am sorry.

*The hon. member for Somerset East requested that the few remaining steam locomotives be replaced. We intend replacing all these steam locomotives with either diesel locomotives or electric units over a period of 15 years. Although I do not know when this will happen, these locomotives will, in fact, be replaced with diesel locomotives. The hon. member spoke about ex-railway officials who have applied for re-employment. He mentioned the figures in this House, and those figures were quite correct. He also said that only 29% of those ex-railway officials applying for re-employment are accepted. This is true, and there are very sound reasons for this. The Management is very accommodating in this respect. The hon. member can rest assured that when the application for the re-employment of an ex-railway official is refused, there are very sound reasons for it. They often have a record one can smell a mile off. Many of them have been employed on the Railways, four, five or six times. But every time they simply abscond like unreliable kaffirs—or let me rather say like unreliable Bantu. But it is not really to the advantage of the Administration to employ that type of people again. It is people such as these who are refused. Many of them resign too easily. As I have said, they simply abscond. They come back after a few weeks or a few months and want to be re-employed. The Management has now adopted a much stricter attitude towards such cases. It is far better to take back good people rather than employ unreliable people, from whom one can expect anything, for a time only.

The hon. member for Yeoville asked that the damaged destination boards on the coaches be replaced. I shall ask the Management to go into this matter. He also mentioned the fact that the documentation costs are 50 cents more than it was in the past. I have personal experience of this. Every time I send a box of fruit to my children I have to pay 50 cents over and above the railage. This is one of the increases introduced in order to get more revenue. Although I should like to see this reduced, I am afraid that, unless the financial position of the Railways improves, we cannot entertain this request.

My question was, what if saving shows that it was for more than 20 %?

I am coming to that. Furthermore, the hon. member asked whether I could again give attention to the reduction of tariffs if I found the revenue, as a result of the increase in tariffs, to be far more than the estimate. All I can say is that adjustments of tariffs may, in fact, be effected. When applications are received from persons who are hard hit by the increase of a particular tariff, the merits of the application are duly considered by the Management and a recommendation made to the Minister. This happens in respect of a few individual tariffs. A general reduction in tariffs can only take place when there is sufficient money. As the hon. member knows, I have, in fact, reduced tariffs in the past. There was a surplus, and I could afford to do so. All we can do is hope that conditions during the year will be so favourable that I will have a large surplus this year. I will have to make provision for the Rates Equalization Fund first before considering any reduction in tariffs.

The hon. member also wanted to know what assurance I have that, when the time comes, the Railways will be in a position to take over the Sishen-Saldanha railway line. He said he had heard that the line would probably be built with a wider gauge than the existing railway lines. As a matter of fact, this was Iscor’s idea originally. When they first mooted this matter to me, the idea was that it should be a 4 ft. 8½ in, railway line. It was suggested that such a railway line would be able to carry much heavier trains, that the iron ore could be conveyed more quickly, and so forth. A mission was subsequently sent to Brazil where there was a similar railway line. The railway line in that country, which is a 3 feet, a metre, railway line, is a private railway line in exactly the same way as this one of Iscor is going to be. The mission found that in Brazil trainloads of ore—this is also iron ore—of 8 000, 10 000 and 12 000 tons are conveyed over long distances on a railway line one metre wide. It is therefore quite unnecessary to build a wider gauge railway line when the same measure of efficiency can be obtained with the ordinary 3 ft. 6 in, railway line. As far as I know, this is still being adhered to and a 3 ft. 6 in, line will be constructed. Tenders have already been called for on that basis and the contract has been signed. The hon. member can therefore rest assured as far as this matter is concerned.

The hon. member for Kuruman requested that we should not increase the carrying capacity of the Hotazel-Kimberley railway line to any great extent, but that we should rather build a by-pass line from Hotazel via Kuruman to Vryburg. He said it would probably be a shorter route to Newcastle. If the hon. member consults the map he will see that Vryburg is situated between the junctions of Pudimoe and Warrenton. When there is a junction at Vryburg, the load will go to Pudimoe where there is a junction for the Lichtenburg line, which is a light line and cannot carry heavy loads at all or, otherwise, the load will go south to Warrenton and on to the main line, but this main line is already over-loaded. The most effective railway line we now have to carry this ore to Newcastle, is the one via Beaconsfield to Hamilton and from Hamilton via Bethlehem and from there to Newcastle or, otherwise, it could also go to Volksrust and from there to Newcastle. I think the suggestion made by the hon. member will not contribute anything at all, except that that beautiful part of the country around Vryburg with its water resources and beautiful scenery will also be included. All I saw there was the Kalahari Desert, but the hon. member says there is also great natural beauty. In any case, it would be to the advantage of Vryburg and Kuruman, but not the advantage of the Railways.

The hon. member for East London City requested that something be done to improve the train service to Mdantsane. A letter was recently addressed to the hon. member about this very same matter in which he was informed that it would be extremely expensive and difficult to build a railway line to within this Bantu township. Up to now it was thought that the bus service was a better arrangement. In view of the construction of the “black road”, as they call it, for quicker road transportation over the Buffalo River to the industrial area, it seems as if the high cost of the construction of a railway line cannot be justified. Furthermore, the hon. member was informed that the extension of the railway services in the light of the adjoining Potsdam area is being investigated by the inter-departmental committee but it is evident that distribution and supply services will have to be provided on the East London side. The construction of new lines are investigated by the inter-departmental committee first, and this committee then makes recommendations. If they recommend that a railway line be constructed and that services be provided the question of whether to proceed with the work depends on whether there is any money available or not. This is the position as far as this matter is concerned. The hon. member mentioned the inability of the Railways to maintain a supply service to feed the silo in East London. This is not correct; this is not the case owing to the inability of the Railways. If the hon. member had taken the trouble to contact the Maize Board, he would have learned that this Board is quite satisfied with the manner in which the Railways handled the maize crop this year. We have had more transport than was provided for in the original agreement entered into with the Maize Board. What does happen in East London is that ships do not arrive at the prescribed time. There is then a congestion of ships outside the harbour. At other times, the entire silo is full while truck-loads of maize are waiting on lines, even as far as in the Transvaal, before ships come in to load the maize. This is what happens there, and this is the reason for the delays.

There are also times when the silo is empty and there are ships waiting to load.

That is quite correct, but this happens when ships arrive in port all at the same time and empty the silo while the grain with which the silo has to be filled again is still on its way there. The hon. member would do well to contact the Maize Board; they will furnish him with the real facts. They will tell him that they are quite satisfied with the manner in which the Railways handled this large crop this year.

The hon. member also wanted to know whether there are facilities for containerization in the harbour. Provision will be made for containerization facilities. I had an interview with one of the chiefs of one of the large shipping lines again only the other day. They have not decided to build containerized ships. They are still waiting to see which way the wind is going to blow. A special ship has to be built to convey the containers; it is not simply a case of converting an ordinary cargo vessel for this purpose. But they have not taken a decision yet. As soon as they decide to build a vessel and as soon as our exporters and importers decide to use containers, all the facilities will be provided. The facilities will also be provided in time in East London. The hon. member also said that ships were finding it difficult to enter the harbour when unfavourable weather conditions prevail. That is correct; the ships are finding it equally difficult here in Cape Town when the south-easter is blowing strongly. This is so as a result of climatic conditions. One can do nothing about it, not even as far as the construction of the harbour is concerned. I have control over the harbour, but believe you me, I have none over the climatic conditions.

You are very modest today.

Don’t you realize that I am indeed a modest man?

*The hon. member for Uitenhage asked that improved passenger services be introduced between Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage. I shall ask the Management to go into this matter. However, I do not know whether this is possible. If the passengers are there to use this service and there is a possibility of improving this service, this will be done.

He also asked that the temporary allowance payable to pensioners be improved. I had to decide to improve either the temporary allowance or the basic pension. If I improve the temporary allowance, it means that even the person who receives a large pension will receive the same benefit as the person receiving a small pension. In other words, the person receiving a pension of R1 000 per year will receive just as much as the person receiving a basic pension of R50 per month, viz. R35 per month. For that reason it was better to effect a 10% increase in the basic pension since this was to the advantage of all the people concerned.

As far as the Benevolent Fund is concerned, each application is considered on merit. There is no norm or fixed amount which is allocated. It depends on the merit and needs of a particular case.

†The hon. member for Simonstown wanted to know whether the train service to Nelspruit could not be improved. The Management will go into that. He spoke about the facilities on the southern suburb line. He mentioned that there was new residential development and that there was congestion in the morning and in the evening. I spoke about that a day or so ago. We have the valley and the peak periods. That is one of the reasons why we are suffering a loss on suburban services. If the working hours were staggered, trains could be profitably run right through the day. But while we have peak and valley periods, it is simply impossible to make suburban lines payable. The General Manager has made notes of the matters raised by the hon. member. He will go into them. He also spoke about the jolting and jarring of suburban trains. Improvements have been brought about; new draw gear has been fitted to most of these coaches. My information is that jolting and jarring is very much less than it used to be. If it is still there, it may probably be due to the drivers; they may not be driving their trains as they should drive them. The Management will go into that and put a few loco inspectors on those trains to see that they do their jobs properly. The hon. member also had something to say about the grubby exterior of the trains and shelters. The question of the subways has been made a note of and the Management will go into that. He said that the railway gates at Kalk Bay harbour and the bridge over the line closed too early. I do not know who is responsible for that, whether it is the Railways or the municipality.

It is the Railways.

But if the bridge is already built you cannot knock it down.

The bridge has not been built; it is a crossing.

But you said that a bridge would be built and that the site is wrong. The Management will go into that matter. You can give them the information beforehand and tell them where you would like the bridge to be built. They can see whether it can be done.

The subways under the control of the Railway Administration are inspected from time to time. It is, however, a fact that people use those subways very often as urinals. You often find that the electric lights are damaged and that the subways are then dark. You cannot possibly have a policeman in every subway. You can only have inspections from time to time. I am afraid that this is a matter which is difficult to rectify.

*The suggestion made by the hon. member for Vanderbijlpark will receive attention.

†The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg City said that the Durban-Cape Town bus service has become so popular that we should run an additional bus. We will certainly give that consideration. He spoke about the development of Napierville and how far the city council has progressed in taking it over. I will ask the Management to go into that matter and to give the hon. member a reply.

The hon. member for Gardens spoke about the increases in harbour charges. The harbour charges have been increased but I need the revenue. The only possible way in getting additional revenue is to increase the rates and tariffs and harbour charges. I do not think that that will make any material difference to the number of ships calling at our harbours. The ship owners have increased their shipping rates but nothing is said about that. Now the harbour charges have been increased slightly, not excessively, and I am afraid that they will have to pay.

In regard to the dry docks, for the first time this year a very small profit has been made on them, because they have been fully occupied.

*The hon. member for Maitland mentioned travel concessions for widows. I shall now explain the present position in the case of a widow who does not receive a pension. The hon. member must bear in mind that there are two types of widows, viz. those covered by the pension laws and who are receiving a pension, and those who do not receive a pension. Widows who do not receive a pension, receive the following concessions: One quarter-price concession for any distance annually on the South African Railways and 12 quarter-price concessions annually for journeys of not more than 161 kilometres, or 322 kilometres return, on the South African Railways. A widow who wants to undertake journeys of more than 161 kilometres, i.e. also return journeys of more than 322 kilometres, may use two or more of the 12 quarter-price travel concessions to which she is entitled annually to cover the whole distance. In addition she also receives one quarter-price concession annually on the Rhodesian Railways. A widow who receives a pension also receives one free pass per year to travel wherever she likes.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. the Minister a question? I just want to ask him whether a widow, in the case of the 12 concessions, could not get the same privilege she had while her husband was still alive? The husband receives 48 concessions, but when he dies, she only receives 12.

No, she does not receive the same pension her husband would have received. The married employees receive more privileges than the unmarried employees.

It does not cost you anything more.

No, it does cost more. Representations have been made in this connection, but I think we are being quite generous in this connection. These are good concessions they are receiving. I have already discussed the subways.

The hon. member also said that he wants to express his profound disappointment that I had washed my hands of the SishenSaldanha railway line. I have already dealt with this matter and advanced the reasons why the Railways are not concerned with it, and why this is going to be a single-purpose line. The line belongs to Sishen; it is going to be a private railway line for the sole purpose of providing for Sishen’s own traffic. I said that when the time arrives one day when the Government of the day decides that other conveyers should also be allowed to use that railway line or that other railway lines should branch off from that railway line to give other exploiters of minerals the opportunity to obtain transport, the railway line will have to be handed over to the South African Railways to manage it and possession of the railway line will also have to be transferred to the Railways.

On what conditions?

On the conditions I mentioned a moment ago. As I say, when the railway line is taken over and run by the Railways, possession of the line will also have to be transferred to the Railways. It will then be managed as a public South African railway line. This will probably happen at some time in future. That is why I said that as soon as the other exporters that are now exporting through Port Elizabeth—and there are five of them who are major exporters—obtain contracts for more iron ore than Port Elizabeth is able to handle, St. Croix will have to be built in order to afford them the opportunity of being able to export all their ore. This will be in the interests of the country, because we need the foreign currency.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth North mentioned crane drivers. This is a matter the Management will have to investigate. Whether they are going 15 minutes earlier or 15 minutes later is not a matter for the Minister to handle. He also mentioned the consulting rooms of the doctors. I did not know the consulting rooms were in such a poor state, but the matter may be investigated and representations may be made to the doctors to see to it that they have decent consulting rooms. As far as the steam locomotives are concerned, these will ultimately be replaced with diesel locomotives, which will then do the shunting. This is not going to happen right now, because this is rather a gradual process. All the steam locomotives will have to be replaced ultimately with either electrical locomotives or diesel locomotives. The hon. member also asked that a luxury passenger train be introduced for Port Elizabeth. If the hon. member can give me the guarantee that the train will always be fully occupied, I will give serious consideration to this matter, but I doubt whether there will be enough passengers travelling from Port Elizabeth to the Rand or to Cape Town to justify such a train. If he does not mind running around a little to ascertain how many people will use such a train and to inform me accordingly, I will give serious consideration to this matter.

†The hon. member for East London North said I am spending very little on the harbours. Well, there is not much to be spent on East London harbour. East London harbour has not yet been worked to its full capacity. There is lots of spare capacity there. I have said on previous occasions that I cannot compel importers or exporters to make use of any particular harbour. I would like them to make greater use of East London harbour, but it is something which is entirely voluntary and we can do nothing about that.

In regard to Item 1179 in the Brown Book, which the hon. member referred to, I have already replied to the hon. member that the present dredgers, namely the Algoa and the Springbok, are being replaced. Both these dredgers are being withdrawn from service as they have reached the end of their economic life. They are being replaced by a dredger which is equipped with grab and suction apparatus.

The hon. member also asked for the 25% rebate on harbour charges to be extended. I do not think I can extend anything now that will mean a loss of revenue, not at this particular stage.

*The hon. member for Bethlehem said that the Drakensberg train, which runs between Johannesburg and Durban at present, should also run from Durban to Cape Town. This would mean that there would probably be only one journey in 14 days to Durban and Cape Town. This train has to travel more than once a week between Johannesburg and Durban, and I am afraid that this is not practical.

As far as Esselen Park is concerned, I just want to say that we are not going to establish any branches; it is not really branch buildings that are going to be erected. It is simply to afford the officials an opportunity of receiving training in the various grades. I doubt whether it will be justified to erect a building there which could be named after the late Mr. Knobel and which would then be a branch of Esselen Park. I must say that the present railway official is very fortunate. In my time there was no such thing as a college. I had to study privately at home to pass my examinations on the Railways. Now railway officials have the opportunity of attending the college, and I must say that Esselen Park is one of our prestige universities. In no country anywhere in the world does one find a similar railway university. Railway officials have excellent opportunities today to get their training there in order to qualify themselves for the various posts.

The hon. member for Ermelo mentioned the station at Watervalboven. I said that that station was going to be built, but there was other work which had to be undertaken simultaneously with the construction of the station, and this matter was already receiving the attention of the Management. The hon. member also asked that a new passenger station be built at Ermelo. I do not know whether or not this is going to be undertaken. I do not know whether there is any need for this. I cannot remember what Ermelo station looks like any more; I saw it many years ago.

What will be the name of the station at Ermelo?

It will most probably be named after the town of Ermelo; Ermelo station.

What about “Ben Schoeman”?

No, if you want to name something after me it will probably have to be something much bigger than that! In any case, I have no time for playing the fool. I have only a few minutes left. The hon. member also mentioned the extension of the railway line to Swaziland. This matter was considered again recently. The shortest route is, of course, from Lothair to Mbabane, but investigations revealed that this will be quite uneconomic. Both the Swaziland Government and I came to the same conclusion, viz. that it is not worth while constructing that railway line at this stage. There is not even sufficient traffic to cover the running costs of that line.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? I want to ask the hon. the Minister to consider the matter in the light of the new Swazi homeland which is being created at present and which is going to be established there and which may probably change the entire complex in this connection.

That homeland will first have to develop industrially, because one cannot make a railway line pay merely through the conveyance of passengers. At present agricultural products are about the only goods which will be transported over that railway line. I must say that I intended, 15 or 16 years ago, constructing that connecting line. I suggested at that time that a railway line be built from Lothair through Swaziland to join up with the Moçambique railway line, or otherwise a railway line to go through Big Bend and join up at Golela. In those days negotiations reached an advanced stage but there was a certain person in those days who was acting on behalf of the Swaziland Administration—a person whose name I do not want to mention now; he is dead now—who wrecked the whole project. That is why this connecting line was not built at that stage.

†The hon. member for Kensington said that he regarded the increases in suburban fares as excessive. I agree that there has been a substantial increase of suburban fares, but in spite of this increase suburban trains are still being run at a considerable loss. As a matter of fact, the Schumann Commission recommended that all fares, both main line and suburban fares, should be increased to such an extent that at least operating costs will be covered. Even this substantial increase does not cover operating costs, except in the case of third-class main line fares. Consequently I cannot even consider the question of reducing the increase on suburban fares or main line fares at this stage.

In the very short time at my disposal I should like to say a few words about the namesake of the hon. the Minister in East London, which in my opinion is somewhat neglected, and that is the Ben Schoeman Airport. As far as our Airways are concerned, I want to say that we are proud of our domestic service. We are proud of our pilots and we are proud of our service. I think it is one of the best in the world. But there is something wrong with the landing facilities in East London. I do not know whether the ground staff is adequate. The Minister has already given me the assurance in the past that if there is insufficient ground control equipment to help aircraft to land when the weather is not so good, the necessary steps will be taken.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 87.

Schedules 1 and 2 agreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

Schedule 4 agreed to.

Clauses and Title agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Mr. Speaker, when this debate was adjourned, I had not in fact made any contribution to the debate except to indicate which two matters I wished to raise at this stage. Sir, the first is a matter raised by the hon. member for South Coast, namely that the Bill does not go as far as the law at present goes in the sense that it only prohibits the killing of seals and sea birds on islands. One finds this prohibition in clause 3 of the Bill. If one reads the Cape Act dealing with this matter, i.e. the Fish Protection Act of 1893, one finds that the objects of the Act are:

Then it goes on and says—

In other words, the provision is there now, in the old Cape Act, to prohibit somebody from shooting a seal in the water or, if he is in a fishing-boat, gaffing him as he passes, or in some other way killing a seal or a sea bird. That Cape Act is to be repealed. It seems to me that this is not properly prohibited in terms of the Bill. It is true that in the regulations section provision is made for the making of regulations—that is clause 11—providing for the further conservation and protection of sea birds or seals. But it seems to me at the very least to be doubtful whether any such regulation purporting to prohibit the killing of seals in the water outside the island, would in fact be valid, and I do believe it would be ultra vires if the Minister were to make such regulations. I think that deserves attention. We believe this is an important Bill and one which is very necessary for the protection of the seal population and the sea birds.

You know, Sir, one of the other reasons why I welcome this Bill is the extraordinary conduct of the hon. the Minister’s department in relation to the killing of seals in the past. In 1970 I asked some questions relating to the killing of seals. The first question I asked was as to the concession for sealing on Seal Island, whether it was put out to tender and if so for what purpose. Now you will recall, Sir, that the killing of seals on Seal Island in Mossel Bay was put out to tender and we were treated to some of the most appalling photographs, which raised the feelings and the dander of many people.

Are you referring to Seal Island at Mossel Bay?

Yes. It raised the anger of all the animal protection societies and the general public. An enormous number of seals were killed. When I asked for what purpose this was done the answer was that it was with a view to the continued execution of a House of Assembly resolution of 16th March, 1962. You know, Sir, since 1834, since the case of Stockdale vs. Hansard, it was then clearly established and clear law that a resolution of one House of Parliament is certainly not law. You will recall that there was a prosecution in this respect.

Order! Is this relevant?

With submission it is, Sir. That resolution which was passed was on a private member’s motion introduced by Dr. Abraham Jonker at the time, and the resolution said this—

The Minister at the time, the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs, speaking on behalf of the Government, said—

Then he said—

That was the attitude. The resolution was passed in this spirit and it could obviously not be taken that seriously. However, if you look at the questions which were asked by myself and the hon. member for Simonstown as to the number of seals that were killed, you find that the number is enormous, in the tens of thousands. This was apparently done by the department on no other basis than that there was a resolution of this House that these seals should be killed. I find it very distressing that a thing like this can happen at all. I hope that the hon. the Deputy Minister will give us an assurance that this attitude on the part of the department is now going to end, that it will be pointed out to them that that resolution has no force of law and cannot be a directive to them, and that, in fact, there will be no culling of seals and no interference with sea birds except on some proper basis and not just on the basis of the advice of the advisers of the hon. the Minister, but on a basis of advice which he will get, not, as I say, just from the conservationists skilled in that field in our country, but after consultation with the international experts and bodies in this field, because the phenomenon of seals and their migration and, in fact, their disappearance is a matter of grave international concern in which there has been an awful lot of research done. I hope that we are going to play our rightful part in this respect. I hope the hon. the Deputy Minister will give us some idea as to the basis on which he is going to proceed in this regard.

There is one other matter about which I hope the hon. the Deputy Minister will be able to give me some clarity. In the definition of “seabird” there is a bird called a “sheathbill”—in Latin the genus “Chionidae” is given. I have never heard of a sheathbill and I have certainly never heard of the family “Chionidae” in our country. So, I looked at the Afrikaans text to see whether I could get some help from that I see that in the Afrikaans text it is “sheath-bill” (Chionidae). [Interjections.] The fact that I have not heard of a sheathbill or of the family Chionidae is not necessarily an indication. That it is not here, but I do not even find it in Roberts, Birds of South Africa and I have looked it up in the Afrikaans index, the English index and the Latin index, but I cannot find it. I hope the hon. the Deputy Minister will be able to tell us what this bird is, whether it is found here, and, if so, where it is found here and whether this is a migratory bird or just what it is.

Like the ooitz bird?

It may be that, like the ooitz bird, it flew in ever-decreasing circles until it eventually disappeared. However, we should like to know from the hon. the Deputy Minister what the position is.

Mr. Chairman, before replying to the hon. members on the particular aspects discussed by them in this debate, I think it is necessary for me to make certain general remarks in regard to the object of the legislation in the light of the discussions that followed. It is perhaps not generally known that the object of this legislation is one of conservation and that when one speaks of the conservation aspects, the human needs and customs come into conflict with the conservation of nature. Therefore it is essential, especially in respect of this particular facet of our work, that we keep in mind the fact that conservation can only be efficient if it can ensure the balance in the form of wise management. In this particular connection I am grateful for the contributions made by the hon. members in the discussion of this Bill. As hon. members will realize, it is necessary for us to formulate a clear conservation aim.

†In determining the conservation aims for marine resources, particularly seals and sea birds in the present context, it is obligatory that one bears in mind that there are various factors that are to be considered and have to be taken into account. I believe that the Government in its capacity as custodian aims at a rational exploitation of marine resources of commercial importance to the best possible advantage of all concerned. To achieve this object, a knowledge, a scientific knowledge of a maximum sustainable yield of the various species is essential, and I think that the remarks of the hon. member for Durban

Hear, hear!

The intensification of research, however, has produced results underlining the necessity for more stringent control. In a situation of this nature, the State is compelled to consider the tightening of conservation measures without causing undue hardship in order to establish interest, that is that consideration is to be given to the various social economic aspects. Another important facet of conservation policy is the question of ecological disturbance or impairment. It is necessary in my opinion that we should guard against the sustained exploitation of any particular species to a level which may accord another species and often a less valuable species, to proliferate at the expense of others. They may trigger off a chain of events which may prove to be irreversible. Certain species also form important components of the diet of exploitable stock. Errors of judgment have in fact in various parts of the world often resulted in effects that they did not anticipate initially. The concept is often referred to as the balance of nature. I would like to assure hon. members that scientists are making rapid strides in unravelling a legion of problems connected with it. For instance, in the case of the Cape seal, the method of culling has often given rise to criticism. The division concerned has, in fact, investigated alternative means of killing these animals.

What commission concerned?

The culling of the seals.

You said the commission concerned.

No, the division.

The division concerned has investigated alternative means of killing the seals.

I cannot hear the hon. member on this earphone.

Order! Is there anything wrong with the earphone?

Yes, Mr. Speaker. This one does not work properly. It is almost impossible to hear what is said in the House.

For the edification of the hon. member, I would like to repeat that the division concerned has in fact investigated alternative measures which have not been successful because they were found to be impracticable or, rather, prohibitive in terms of cost. The local S.P.C.A. has also been invited to attend a knock and, in fact, sent three representatives to Seal Island in False Bay. To date no report has been received from this society and it can only be concluded that it feels that adequate control is in fact being exercised. It is interesting to note that the United States has had similar complaints of prosealing activities on certain islands in the Bering Sea. A panel of experts, investigating these allegations, however, reported that all seals were clinically dead when killing was commenced. As far as the state of seal stocks is concerned, a recent investigation by the Sea Fisheries branch proved that with minor exceptions the colonies are in sound condition. Research using marking and recapture techniques and aerial photography continues. In this way the various rookeries are monitored.

The role of the guano-producing sea birds in the ecology of the marine environment is appreciated. These birds are accorded protection and the State has, in fact, resisted pressure to reduce their numbers. It is known that the activities of man, mainly fishing, have in some instances caused a reduction in the bird population. However, we are confident that the various species are capable of sustaining their population at present levels and that no species is regarded as being in danger of extinction. In fact, in certain areas artificial conditions have been created as to the benefit of the successful breeding of sea birds.

*Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out in this particular connection that criticism has been voiced in respect of two aspects of the conservation of seals. In furnishing the House with this information I am also replying to the hon. member for Durban North. As I have said, the criticism really concerns two areas: firstly, that the Cape Fur seal, a unique species which is found only on the coast of Southern Africa, is being or may be exposed to extinction through commercial exploitation, and, secondly, that the clubbing of seal cubs is cruel. May I just tell hon. members in respect of the first criticism that the seal population of South Africa extends over a total of 12 separate colonies, at places on the coast from Algoa Bay on the one side up to an area south of the Kunene on the other side. Most of these colonies are found on remote and relatively inaccessible islands. Four of the biggest colonies are found on the mainland on the west coast, within the protected diamond areas, where access is very strictly controlled. So the seals there are in no danger of being exterminated. According to the information available up to date the total seal population is approximately 800 000. Only about 70 000 cubs and 5 000 bulls are killed every year. This represents approximately 10% of the total estimated population. The fact that seals are being under-exploited, as these figures indicate, is also confirmed by observations which indicate that the population of most of the colonies have increased in recent years, in spite of constant exploitation over the years. My information is that the natural mortality of seal cubs in their first year of life must be estimated at least 70% of the increase, which means that a much larger number of the cubs die as a result of natural and other causes than are killed as a result of exploitation. I believe that since the fish supplies on our coast are being exploited so intensively and to an increasing extent, it is essential for the preservation of the natural balance that the seals should not be allowed to multiply unchecked. Even if the fur industry as such should collapse, and there should consequently be no commercial value in reducing the numbers of the seals, we should still have to continue hunting seals in order to keep their numbers under control. Scientists of the division of Sea Fisheries are working on their study of the population dynamics of the Cape Fur seal and it is hoped that it will soon be possible to place the level of exploitation of the various colonies on a scientific basis, as the hon. member has in fact requested.

As regards the criticism in respect of the allegedly cruel hunting methods, it is a fact that the method which has been employed up to now and which has been regarded as the most efficient is that of clubbing them. It is a fact that the skulls of the young cubs are still soft and that one blow on the head is enough to ensure a quick and painless death. I want to reassure hon. members at once in this regard. Skinning a seal which is not yet dead would, as hon. members will understand, mean damage to the skin. Such a skin would be of no value to the hunter. Accordingly I want to repeat what I just said, namely that inspectors of the Cape Peninsula S.P.C.A., too, have several times accompanied officials of the Department and private bodies that kill seals on seal-hunts. None of the people who have been present at the seal-hunts have yet been able to find any fault with or to object to the methods that are used. I may just mention that in 1971 three members of the local S.P.C.A., including two ladies, attended a seal-hunt on Seal Island in False Bay at the invitation of the superintendent of the State Guano Islands. They were to have reported to their head office, but we have not received any negative report up till now. I also want to say at once that we take cognizance in this particular connection of the experience and knowledge of other countries. In this way it is true that very urgent representations were made to the Administration in America recently, protesting against the hunting of seals by this particular method in the Bering Sea area. The American Secretary for the Interior at that time had the matter investigated in consequence of these complaints and stated unambiguously in his report that the clubbing was the best method of killing the seals without cruelty.

†It is in fact gratifying to me personally that the hon. member for South Coast was the first speaker on the other side on the first Bill that I introduced in this House. I am also grateful that the subject matter of this Bill is one that is receiving the unanimous support of all the members of this House. I know that the hon. member for South Coast is a very convinced conservationist, but also a practical one and that he speaks with authority on the subject. I wish to say that his contribution to the debate led to many improvements in the Bill itself. I would like to thank him personally for his contribution in this regard. As I have already indicated in my introductory remarks, the hon. member did have discussions with the Minister of Economic Affairs who has accepted certain recommendations submitted to him by the hon. member which will be introduced as amendments in the Committee Stage. The hon. member has done very commendable work in the field of nature conservation as a member of the Natal Parks Board. I also wish to thank him for that. It is therefore, I think, appropriate that the first amendment which I intend introducing at the request of the hon. member will relate to the possibility of delegating the powers which are being conferred on the Minister in terms of this Bill, to a statutory body such as the Natal Parks Board.

The hon. member also raised the question of the advisability of providing in the Bill that an official of the department exercising the powers in terms of clause 10 of the Bill should identify himself to the people concerned. I think this point is well taken and I intend introducing an amendment to accommodate the argument of the hon. member. Apart from these amendments to which I have just referred the hon. member for South Coast raised certain other issues, one of which was also raised by the hon. member for Durban North. If my memory serves me correctly the hon. member expressed doubt as to whether the scope of clause 3 is wide enough to cope with the situation where offences are committed not on an island but from the shore or a boat. I should like to clarify the position immediately. Reference to clause 3(b) will clearly indicate that certain actions constitute offences whether they are perpetrated on the island or within the territorial waters of South Africa along the coast between high water and low water mark. That is also in reply to the question raised by the hon. member for Durban North. The hon. member is under the impression that as the Bill now reads no powers of arrest exist on the island. I would like to assure the hon. member immediately that when an offence is committed other than on the island the offender can be apprehended in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act. The difference is that the arrest on the island can take place without a warrant of arrest. The hon. member also indicated that according to his view no provision has been made for dealing with guano. I am now referring to the hon. member for South Coast. I should like to refer the hon. member to clause 2 (1) (a). Guano is a product of sea birds and clause 3 (c) also prohibits the removal of guano without a permit.

*I think I have replied to the arguments and points raised by hon. members on the other side. The hon. member for Omaruru has apologized to me personally for not being able to attend, due to circumstances beyond his control. I want to say at once that this hon. member, and this goes for other hon. members as well, has furnished us with illuminating information and has spoken with authority on a subject on which he is obviously well informed. The hon. member referred to four different aspects which I want to deal with very briefly. In the first place the hon. member referred to the existing activities of the division of Sea Fisheries of the Department of Industries, as far as the exploitation of guano and seals is concerned. The hon. member pleaded that these activities should all be transferred to private industry and that the department should only be concerned in this matter for purposes of conservation, control and research. I want to explain at once that the commission of inquiry into the fishing industry adopted a similar standpoint in this particular regard, although they made no definite recommendation in this connection.

He was a member of the commission.

Yes. As hon. members know, and as the Minister of Economic Affairs has explained from time to time under his Vote, the Department of Industries has long accepted the principle that the exploitation of guano and seals should be transferred to the private sector by way of public tenders, and several concessions have accordingly been made in this regard; and I can tell hon. members that the department is at present considering proposals for transferring all these functions of exploitation to the private sector.

By way of tender?

Yes, by way of tender. In this particular regard I should just mention that experience showed us in the past that there does not always exist sufficient interest on the part of the private sector to obtain the concessions that they are able to, mainly because of certain economic considerations, and these are that some of the islands and the seal colonies are to be found at relatively remote places and are inaccessible as well, and consequently the department will have to perform these functions of exploitation itself. In the past year or so the demand for and the prices of seal skins have increased to such an extent that the private sector too may now be interested in the inaccessible areas which, for economic reasons, did not really excite their interest in the past.

In the second place the hon. member spoke with considerable authority on the present state of the seal colonies along the coast and he gave estimated figures in respect of the numbers of these colonies. He indicated that the present level of the exploitation of seals can be raised considerably without the status of the resource being adversely affected.

Is there any indication, on the grounds of research undertaken by the Department, that the seal colonies are growing in size?

I have already indicated that the number of seals is estimated at about 800 000 at the moment and that only 10% is exploited every year, which immediately indicates that there is no over-exploitation; in fact, according to our present information there is really an under-exploitation of seals.

My information is that there are too many seals.

Yes, our information is in keeping with that. That is why I say that there is an under-exploitation and not an over-exploitation.

Sir, I want to say in this regard that the scientists of the division of Sea Fisheries have been engaged in population studies of the seal colonies for the past 18 months to try to determine the rate of increase, and I want to emphasize that in conjunction with this a seal marking programme has been launched and is still under way. A knowledge of the population of the colonies and their rate of increase will therefore make it possible for me and for the department to determine on a scientific basis whether the existing rate of exploitation is really justified, for this information can ensure, in the first place, that these resources made available to us by nature will be exploited on an economic basis; secondly, that we shall also be able to ensure that the increase of the seal colonies will be kept within bounds so that it will not encroach upon the fish resources on which the fishing industry is based; and, thirdly, that we can prevent the ecologic balance in the area from being disturbed, in accordance with the department’s aim of conservation, as I have already explained it.

The hon. member indicated that sea birds devour a large amount of fish. However—and I should like to emphasize this -—they are also responsible for keeping down the numbers of other predatory enemies of commercial fish, which compete with the commercial fish for the same food. At any rate, the statistics of the guano yield on the islands continue to show a downward trend from approximately 10 000 tons a year before 1945 to approximately 2 500 tons for the year 1972, which clearly indicates that the number of fish-eating sea birds has been decreasing naturally as the fish supplies on the west coast are being exploited more and more intensively. So it would appear, as far as the numbers of sea birds are concerned, that nature itself is counteracting an unnaturally rapid increase of the birds and is therefore maintaining on a sound basis the balance between the presence of the fish and the increase of the birds.

The hon. member also mentioned the annoyance caused to the fishing industry by seals and he referred to the problem that fishermen have to contend with when these seals get caught in their nets. He also expressed concern in this regard that the prohibition in clause 3 (b) might prevent a fisherman from chasing away a seal swimming in his net. In the first place I want to tell the hon. member that the division of Sea Fisheries has now completed the experiments with crackers, to which he also referred, and that the results of these experiments up to date have confirmed that this method is only partially effective. However, our scientists are at present testing a sound deterrent. The principle on which this deterrent works is that the sound of a killer whale is emitted under water from the fishing boat. The deterrent is similar to the one already used at airports to scare away birds that are a nuisance to air traffic. The experiments with this deterrent have not been completed yet and further investigation in this particular regard is till being conducted.

As regards the hon. member’s problem in respect of chasing away seals from the nets, I want to assure the hon. member at once that I have gone into this particular aspect and that there should be no problem in this regard. Fishermen who are compelled in the course of their lawful fishing activities to remove seals from their nets or wilfully to disturb them in another way—those are the words in the Bill—in order to continue with their fishing activities will be safeguarded against prosecution in terms of clause 3(b), since the granting of tacit authority for such removal must be read into the said clause 3(b). This is so because clause 3(b) does not impose an absolute prohibition on disturbing seals, so that if seals should enter the net of the fisherman by accident or even through negligence on the fisherman’s part, he would not be committing an offence in his subsequent removal of the seals, and although it would have the objects of a deliberate action, it would be done in order to eliminate a further intentional disturbance of the seals and interference with the lawful fishing activities. I want to emphasize that this tacit authority is a consequence of the fact that the fishing activities are regulated and permitted by law, and it is a principle of interpretation of the law that where a law requires or allows a particular result or action it is also necessary in reason to bring about the result or to perform the action effectively. In so far as the fishermen are practising legal fishing activities, they will therefore be entitled to do so and safeguarded against prosecution.

If they remove the seals or if they kill them?

Both. The clause provides that no person shall wilfully disturb or kill seals.

With these remarks I have replied to the various aspects raised by hon. members, I think, except for the interest of the hon. member for Durban North in “ski-boat” and especially in the Afrikaans translation of the term in quotation marks, which is important in the light of his attitude to the other legislation which has been passed by the House in which this translation also occurs. I wonder whether the hon. member will allow me to give him this information in the Committee Stage.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

In the main the proposed amendment to the principal Act, as set out in this Bill, makes provision for certain sections of the Act to be adapted so as to keep pace with present-day circumstances. The only two new principles that are being proposed, are that the provisions of the Act shall now apply to South-West Africa as well and that the board’s liability shall be restricted in cases where damage should subsequently be caused by the spontaneous combustion of coal in respect of which a grading certificate was issued by the Fuel Research Board.

I want to explain the provisions of this legislation in brief:

Clause 1(a): In terms of the present provisions of section 15 of the Act, read in conjunction with the definition of “bunkering”, the board is required, inter alia, to issue grading certificates also in respect of coal supplied to coasting ships and fishing boats. This has the effect that the board has to have two officers in every port for the taking of samples and for seeing to it that the provisions of these certificates are complied with. The quantity of coal and the number of fishing boats and coasting ships involved at present are minimal and do not justify the staff required for exercising supervision in this regard. The object of the Act is merely that coal intended for export should be graded, and from a practical and staff-saving point of view coasting ships and fishing boats are excluded from the definition of “bunkering”.

Clause 1(b): With a view to possible future coal-mining development it is being deemed necessary to apply the Act to South-West Africa as well, and the definition of “Republic” which also includes South-West Africa, is therefore being inserted. Clause 10 of the Bill deals further with this aspect.

Clause 1(d): As a result of the obscurity that obtains in regard to the meaning of a “colliery” for the purposes of this Act and in order to prevent the consequent evasion of levies payable by coal-producers, it is necessary to insert the definition of “colliery”.

Clause 1(c): As a result of the fact that countries such as Northern and Southern Rhodesia no longer exist, it is necessary to adapt the definition of “export” for the purposes of this Act.

Clause 2: This amendment merely corrects an erroneous reference in the Afrikaans text of section 2(3).

Clause 3: The proposed amendment will authorize the State President to appoint alternates to all six members of the Fuel Research Board. At present he may only do so in respect of the following members: (a) the member representing the Transvaal and Orange Free State colliery interests; (b) the member representing the Natal and Cape Province colliery interests; (c) the member representing the C.S.I.R.; and (d) the member appointed on the ground of having special knowledge of and interest in problems relating to the utilization of coal. The remaining two members may be appointed by the State President at his discretion, and the fact that there is no provision for alternates to them to be appointed, often gives rise to problems in regard to effecting quorums at board meetings.

Clause 4: This clause provides (a) that the levies referred to in section 7 of the Act shall be expressed in metric units, and (b) that the minimum production level of coal-producers having to nay these levies shall be lowered from 25 000 to 10 000 tons of coal per year. The reason is to be found in the fact that the Fuel Research Institute has found that some coal producers have been manipulating their production returns so as to evade liability for the payment of the prescribed levies. By way of the proposed lowered production level of 10 000 tons per year this practice will largely be eliminated in future, since we only have approximately six collieries in the country which are producing about 25 000 tons of coal per year. This will bring the Institute a slight increase in revenue but is considered to be justified in view of the fact that these smaller producers are also enjoying the benefit of the Institute’s services. Furthermore this clause provides (c) that the words “industrial alcohol” be deleted in section 7(4). The existing definition gives rise to confusion in that alcohol is also being produced for other industrial uses, which are therefore not subject to the levy imposed on power alcohol, and which will be removed by the proposed amendment.

Clause 4(b): The proposed insertion of a new section 7(4A) will supply an existing deficiency in the Act and ensure that the furnishing of production statements by producers to the Institute in respect of coal, torbanite, oil-shale and power alcohol will be statutorily enforceable.

Clause 5: The proposed substitution of section 10(2) will correct the present wording of this section, which has become obsolete, and impose an obligation on persons to give the Institute three months’ notice of their intention to commence or terminate coal mining or the production of torbanite, oil-shale or power alcohol. The proposed amendment will eliminate a great deal of unnecessary administrative work for the Institute in that the latter will no longer be charged with correspondence, etc., with coal mines which in effect no longer exist, whereas it will at the same time ensure that the Institute will be acquainted with new colliery activities, which will now include such activities also as far as South-West Africa is concerned.

†Clause 6: Section 11(4) of the Act stipulates that a foreign vessel entering South African ports to ship in coal shall submit beforehand a schedule of the quantity and type of coal it has on board. This provision has been in disuse for several years and as it has no particular purpose it is suggested that it be deleted.

Clause 7: The grading of coal is one of the functions of the Institute as determined by section 2(2) of the Act and grading certificates are issued by the Institute mainly for export purposes regarding the composition of coal produced by mines. Due to the inherent qualities of certain types of coal, it may happen that in certain circumstances coal placed in the vicinity of heated boilers or under conditions where air circulation is inadequate, is liable to spontaneous combustion.

Although the Institute is not aware of any case where the spontaneous combustion of coal has in fact occurred, the possibility of this happening in cases where grading certificates have been issued is not excluded. As spontaneous combustion may well be due to reasons beyond the control of the Institute, it is considered advisable that the liability of the Institute should be limited in this connection. The amendment of section 14(2) of the Act by clause 7 makes provision for this.

Clause 8: In terms of section 16 of the Act the Minister, in consultation with the Institute, controls the export of coal in cases where a certain type of coal may be in short supply or where it is considered necessary in the public interest.

It is my opinion that control in this regard should preferably be exercised in terms of the general export control measures as administered by the Minister of Economic Affairs in consultation with the Secretary for Commerce and the Director of Imports and Exports. The deletion of section 16 is therefore proposed by clause 8.

Clause 9 provides for a consequential amendment and will enable the State President to make regulations prescribing the details and form of the statement referred to in clause 4(b).

In terms of clause 10, the provisions of the Act will also be made applicable to South-West Africa. The Institute is aware that prospecting for coal in South-West Africa is being undertaken from time to time and it is considered important that information in this connection should be made available to the Institute to enable it to fulfil more effectively its function of investigating the fuel resources of the whole Republic and also of South-West Africa as prescribed by the Act.

These are the matters embraced by the principles contained in this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, we shall support this Bill. I want to congratulate the hon. the Minister that his first two Bills have met with the approval of this side of the House, but I do not want him to be under any illusion or live in a fool’s paradise because he may well find that we may not be able to keep up this constant approval of his Bills.

In any event, we approve of the Bill. We agree with the hon. the Deputy Minister that there should be this amendment in regard to bunkering of coasting ships and fishing boats. I am not quite sure what the phrase “coasting ships” means. I have heard of “coasters”, but I have not heard what the phrase “coasting ships” means. However, I do not think that that is very material. We also agree that a lot of collieries today are open-cast and should be brought within the ambit of this Bill. Clause 4 is in the main a consequential amendment on account of metrication, and is an amendment which we accept, as well as the other provisions which the hon. the Minister has explained to us this afternoon.

Clause 5 does present us with a bit of a problem. It provides that:

We have no objection to the three months’ notification of the commencement of activities, but we have some difficulty in regard to the notification of termination of such activity over a period of three months. We can conceive of a situation where, through an act of God, through an act of negligence or of gross negligence, something may occur in a mine which will make it essential for that mine to be closed down immediately, and leave no alternative but that the mine will have to close down. Let us say, for example, that a miner quite illegally lights a cigarette, which would be a grossly negligent act. An explosion follows the mine burns out and the mine has come to an end. That mine cannot give the hon. the Minister three months’ notice that it is going to close down. In effect, its operation has closed down, unless the interpretation of the phrase “termination of such activities” merely means the stopping of mining. We would like to have some information from the hon. the Minister on this issue. Alternatively, we would like provision to be made to take care of such circumstances. Quite obviously, in terms of the new development which has been taking place in South-West Africa over the last year or two, South-West Africa has had to be included in this Bill and we accept it. We will support the Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I hasten to assure the hon. member that I am not under the illusion that the two of us will always get along so well with each other in this House. Besides, I should imagine that if we were to follow a procedure other than the peace that has now broken out, both of us would welcome it.

†Mr. Speaker, I hasten to assure the hon. member that what is required in clause 5 is that notification shall be given of intention to commence or the intention to terminate such mining activity, and I stress “intention”. When the termination comes about without the mine owner being responsible tor such action, this particular clause will not apply to him. There cannot be any suggestion whatsoever that he could be held responsible in terms of this clause when an act beyond his own control takes place, that is to say, when he did not intend such an act to take place. So, no amendment is required. I may just add that the hon. member did discuss this with me and that I in fact discussed it again with the legal advisers. I am satisfied that the circumstances to which he refers will not be covered by the Act.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Many of the hon. members are acquainted with the housing complexes generally known as “Government villages” which are situated on the Rand, and in Port Elizabeth, East London and Pietermaritzburg. However, I think it advisable that I recall briefly, for general information, the development of these Government villages.

Towards the end of 1944 a start was made with the conversion of certain military camps into residential areas for returning soldiers and their families. When the conversion was completed regulations were made in terms of Proclamation No. 131 of 1945, known as War Measure No. 40 of 1945, in terms of which a board of management was established to manage the converted camps, then called Government villages, and allocate the accommodation to ex-volunteers. In terms of the Government Villages Act, 1950 (No. 28 of 1950) the board of management was abolished and the Minister of Public Works was empowered to appoint a Controller of Government villages “to manage and control all Government villages and buildings converted or erected and available for the purpose of providing accommodation for ex-volunteers and their families”. Subsequently all matters affecting the Government villages were in due course entrusted to the Department of Community Development, and today the Secretary of Community Development is the Controller.

There are Government villages at the places mentioned in the definition of “Government villages” in the Bill. A total of almost 1 280 residential units are provided in these residential complexes. As already indicated the dwellings consist of converted military huts which are well suited to being rented to families in the lower income bracket. Consequently an attempt is being made to make at least half of the number of residential units available to the sub-economic group, i.e. families with an income of not more than R130 per month. These Government villages are undoubtedly supplying a major need for accommodation in the centres where they are situated, and it is essential that they continue to exist.

Measured against present standards, however, the complexes in question are inadequate as far as certain amenities are concerned. In addition it is also necessary to make the general appearance of the villages more attractive because, although they were previously situated completely outside normal peri-urban development, they are at present virtually surrounded by urban development. For the purpose of adaptation it is necessary for a number of unserviceable structures to be demolished, for attention to be given to garden development and the planting of trees, and for the maintenance of recreational facilities in a sound condition and the availability of the necessary equipment to be ensured.

The existing Government Villages Act, 1950, is completely obsolete because the purpose for which it was placed on the Statute Book, viz. the accommodation of ex-volunteers and their families, was served a long time ago. Very few, if any, ex-volunteers from the last World War are still living there. The powers of the Controller in terms of the Act, which are restricted almost exclusively to the admission of ex-soldiers and their families, rent collection and management of the community, is inadequate for a modern community. It is therefore necessary to renew the present provisions as contained in the existing Government Villages Act, 1950.

Although you have before you a new Bill which repeals the existing Government Villages Act, 1950, the new Bill in actual fact comprises provisions similar to those contained in the existing Act with the following (a) adjustments and (b) new provisions. I shall deal with each of these aspects separately:

(a) Adjustments:

As has already been indicated, the Government villages are today the responsibility of the Department of Community Development. It is therefore necessary to replace the Minister of Public Works with the Minister of Community Development. There is no possibility today that a person from outside will be appointed as Controller, as the existing Act allows. The Secretary for Community Development is the present Controller and for all practical purposes he is the most suitable person to act in that capacity, and consequently the Bill does away with the Controller as such.

As has already been mentioned, the original purpose for which the Government Villages were established has become obsolete, and consequently it is necessary to give a contemporary description of the concept of “Government village”, as is being done in the Bill.

(b) New Provisions:

As I initially indicated, the powers of the Controller in terms of the existing Act are very limited, and consequently it is deemed necessary to extend the powers and official duties of the Secretary so as to enable him to manage and control the Government villages effectively under present-day circumstances. The expansion in this respect is that the Secretary is being empowered to undertake maintenance, alterations, demolition and reconstructions, development and redevelopment—clause 2(2)(a)(i) to (iv) of the Bill relate to this. In addition to that the Secretary may also provide and maintain amenities and equipment for the inhabitants (as provided in clause 2(2)(a)(iv)), which will enable him to ensure that recreational facilities, particularly halls, are maintained in good condition. This provision is very necessary in the interests of the satisfactory occupation and common welfare of the Government villages. In addition the Secretary is being empowered to determine limits of income etc., for admission to Government villages, in consultation with the Treasury (clause 2(2)(b)(ii) and (2)(iii)). This provision is in line with provisions contained in the Housing Act, 1966, in respect of the provision of housing for the lower income groups.

The Bill is therefore no new measure but merely an improvement to and supplementation of the existing Government Villages Act, 1950.

Mr. Speaker, this Bill comes before us as the hon. the Minister has indicated following the provision of housing for a particular need, the disappearance of the need for which the houses were originally supplied and the necessity for the continuance of these facilities for other groups of persons. We will support the measure. We believe that it is correct and that it should be brought under the control of the Department of Community Development. These camps or villages were erected as part of the demobilization scheme to provide for ex-servicemen returning at the end of the last war. At that time the need was a roof over the heads of these men and their families when they came back. I can recall many gentlemen who in later years distinguished themselves in various fields in South Africa who spent the first few years after the war occupying one or other of these houses or other accommodation that was available in these villages. Although times have changed, the need for the retention of these units as dwelling units is perhaps now more necessary because of the financial implications of acquiring houses today.

I want to come to the hon. the Minister’s statement that there is no intention of limiting in any way the housing facilities that are available in these villages. It is his intention to improve them, to improve the layout, to plant trees, to provide recreation facilities by utilizing the powers that will be in this Bill to reconstruct and renovate as far as possible. Sir, I look forward to seeing this work being done. One knows from visits to some of these villages that they have been left for a long time without receiving the necessary attention to make them more attractive in all aspects for the persons who reside there. I think the hon. the Minister said that there were some 1 200 dwelling units in these villages …

1281.

I am sure that these villages will continue for a considerable time to serve a very useful purpose in housing persons in the lower income group. We welcome this streamlining of the control and we look forward to seeing great developments in these villages.

Sir, I should like to associate myself wholeheartedly with the Bill, and certainly give it my firm support. There are one of these Government villages, with the rather unique name of Cradock Place, in my constituency as well. As the hon. the Minister indicated, these Government villages were formerly military barracks which were converted just after the last World War into residential units for returning soldiers. In 1949 the then Minister of Public Works appointed a commission to investigate the future of these villages, and as a result of the report of that commission, the Government Villages Act of 1950 was placed on the Statute Book. Sir, it is very interesting to note that this Commission made one very interesting recommendation, which was that these villages were only to be used as dwelling places for a further ten years, and were then to be demolished. The then Minister of Public Works, whom we still have with us in the person of the hon. the Minister of Transport, accepted most of the recommendations of that commission, but he said that he could not accept the recommendation that these Government villages should be demolished because he could not foresee what the housing need and the housing situation would be like in ten years’ time. Sir, one cannot help according high praise to that very wise decision of the then Minister of Public Works, particularly when one realizes what a tremendously great need has been met by these Government villages, and particularly by the one in my constituency, in our housing pattern over the past years. Where, in fact, would it have been possible to accommodate the thousands of people with low incomes if it had not been possible to retain the houses in these Government villages? In the Government village of Cradock Place, which I am discussing, there are at present considerably more than 800 people living in 196 residential units. Of these 65 are one-bedroom residential units; 76 are two-bedroom flats and 64 are three-bedroom flats. Of these plus-minus 800 inhabitants of Cradock Place, approximately 120 are elderly persons, people who have reached advanced ages and who have a low income. Because these houses were built at a time when things were cheaper, the rent is very low, and one is very grateful for this Bill being placed on the Statute Book now so that these little houses may be maintained and cared for further by the Department. Living in this village at the moment are 276 children of schoolgoing age. I do not know how many pre-school children there are, but apart from the elderly people who are living there, these are people with large families, and there are therefore large numbers of pre-school children in that village. It is a much-sought-after residential area. In spite of the fact that serious deficiencies and shortcomings have developed over the years there is nevertheless a great need for and a tremendously great demand for these inexpensive residential units because the rental is low, and there will always be people who, owing to some or other illness or infirmity of the head of the family, have a low income and who simply cannot afford the expensive dwellings which are being erected today.

In terms of this Bill which is now under discussion the department is being empowered, inter alia, to maintain, improve or demolish buildings, fences, etc., in these Government villages. Inter alia, the department may also now plan and develop the land and construct and maintain the streets. It is a very important and very essential arrangement that this Bill should now be placed on the Statute Book because the existing Act does not empower the department to effect improvements to the houses and the streets of these villages. Many of these residential units have developed into relatively unattractive places and have become dilapidated because it was not possible to do the necessary repair work. I am thinking in particular of the streets. I visited another of these Government villages as well, in another town on the Rand, and at that place the streets are still in a very poor condition. When I became M.P. for Algoa in 1966 the condition of the streets in this Government village was absolutely deplorable; one could hardly drive along them. The department was not empowered to construct roads, and the local authority refused to do so. There were furrows and deep holes in the streets and after it had rained the children had a wonderful time there swimming in the furrows and playing in the mud, they might even have drowned themselves there but one could not drive though those streets. The situation was absolutely critical. With the help of the Department and with the help of the very helpful local representative in Port Elizabeth at the time, Mr. Coetzee, we managed in one way or another to succeed—and I must say with the enthusiasm of a very enthusiastic young member of the House of Assembly—in getting those streets tarred. I hope I am not letting something slip now which should perhaps have remained a secret, but fortunately those streets were tarred. But, as I say, the circumstances there were in fact exceptional, and the measures which had to be taken to get those streets tarred were also exceptional. In addition the streets had no names and the numbers were terribly confusing. One simply could not find anyone living there. This was fortunately remedied, but this shows into what a condition that place had deteriorated because the Department did not have the power to effect those improvements.

Another problem which was far more difficult and which it has not been possible to rectify despite all the enthusiasm in the world on my part is the question of the cement floors in those houses. Of the 196 residential units in that town, only eight have wooden floors. They were, of course, in great demand, and we had a great deal of difficulty because people who were ill knew that people who were in good health were living in the houses with wooden floors and they wanted to swop houses, etc. You will appreciate, Sir, that in the winter cold, particularly in the case of the elderly people living there, those cement floors gave rise to very serious health problems, and everyone frequently had to try to beg a carpet here and there in order to help these people. Since the department now has the specific right in terms of this Bill to improve the buildings, I want to make an appeal at this early stage for something to be done, if possible before the winter, about these cement floors. This would save the inhabitants of that Government village and myself many sleepless nights, for with the winter cold come the pains of rheumatism, and for that reason I am making a serious representation now.

The same applies to the question of fencing. Sir, it is traditional among us farming folk that we would like a little fence around our house. Many of the inhabitants have constructed fences around those properties in their own way and some of them are not exactly the neatest one can find. When a change in ownership took place it gave rise to serious quarrels and problems, for the person who was leaving was very eager to have the new owner pay him out for the costs which he had incurred in putting up the fence, or if that did not happen, the person who had left returned at a later stage and wanted to take his fence down. If such problems crop up, the M.P. has to try and find a solution with the wisdom of a Solomon. Many of these fences subsequently became rather primitive and untidy and the Department then displayed a great deal of wisdom and decided that all those fences had to be removed. This of course gave rise to considerable bitterness. I now note that the hon. the Minister, in his wisdom wants to make specific provision in the Bill for the Department to take care of the matter of fencing. I trust that many of these inhabitants who constructed their own fences there and subsequently lost them, will receive neat new fences from the Department.

Although streets have already been tarred in Cradock Place, it was not done very neatly. At the time the tar was merely poured over the sand, but it is still lasting. At the time no pavements were constructed, and up to the present there are still no pavements. With the large number of children there, this is in fact a major safety problem, for the children’s lives are not always safe owing to the fact that there are no pavements. I trust that attention will be given to this matter as well.

I am very pleased that specific mention is being made in the Bill of planning, development and the development of land. It will be understood that in such a village which was established many years ago merely as a military barracks and which it has not been possible since then to develop, repair or plan neatly, serious problems exist for such a large number of people and children as there are now. I do want to ask whether it cannot be considered or whether attention cannot be given to the possibility of establishing neat playgrounds or perhaps a small park for the children so that they need not play in the streets all day. This is a great need in that area. We have a large number of children there and the houses are very small. Most of the younger married couples living there have seven or eight children. We should like to encourage our people to have large families, but we really must make provision for proper playgrounds for those children. I should very definitely like to bring this aspect to the attention of the hon. the Minister.

In conclusion I want to express the hope that this Bill will enable the department to do something in regard to housing in those Government villages. It is an aspect which for many years had to be left in abeyance. Although the rental is exceptionally low, the department has in the course of years probably collected a large amount in the form of rentals. I trust that the necessary attention will now be given to improvements. In addition I want to make a specific and strong plea to the effect that we should not merely increase the rentals. This Government village with its low rental meets our housing needs to an exceptional extent for in Port Elizabeth one does not find similar accommodation at such a low rental. There is a great need for it. I must state here that there is a very long waiting list for those houses in spite of the less favourable things which are being said about them. They wait a long time to get in, but the people who …

Order! That has nothing to do with the Bill.

Mr. Speaker, since we now have the opportunity to do so I just want to say that improvements can be effected.

Order!

Mr. Speaker, I should like to associate myself with what the hon. member for Algoa has said, for we know that that village which is called Cradock Place and the other Government villages are of common interest in providing accommodation for our people in our cities. In addition I just want to point out briefly that those villages are by this time of historical value. I know the Opposition look at us mockingly when we refer to the Government villages, for these were their former military camps. The men who fought in the last war were accommodated there; there were also communal dining halls. Now I feel that we should preserve those villages, for they are historical places. We should not refer so derogatorily to those places. I made the acquaintance of those Government villages in 1948, and I can inform hon. members that I was given a warm reception there. In 1948 I made my first political speech in one of those villages in Port Elizabeth. [Interjections.] As I have said, it was a heated meeting. I told the people that I had not come to make war, but had come to bring peace and light. I told them that I brought the message of Nationalism.

Order! Is the hon.member dealing with the Bill?

Mr. Speaker, I should like to confine myself to the Bill now. It is of the utmost importance to us that those villages are now going to be placed in the hands of the Department of Community Development. Clause 2(2) (a) provides, inter alia, that the Secretary shall fulfil the following functions—

1. (ii) plan, develop and redevelop land;
2. (iii) construct, reconstruct and maintain roads and streets;

That is exactly what I am advocating here. I quote further—

1. (iv) provide, improve and maintain services;
2. (v) provide, develop and maintain such amenities, including equipment, as are, in the opinion of the Secretary, in the interests of the inhabitants of Government villages …

Order! It is not necessary to read the Bill. We have the Bill before us.

If we implement …

This is the Second Reading.

If we implement the provision of this legislation, those villages will be able to stand there as monuments in the distant future, not only as monuments which remind us of the previous war, but as something which may also serve to accommodate our people. I just want to refer now to the clause in the legislation which states that the rental of the houses shall be determined. I should like to associate myself with the hon. the Minister and advocate that the determination of a limit of R130 be reconsidered for people in the lower income group. That qualification which determines the maximum amount for residence in that village at R130, is in my opinion too low. Owing to the increase in cost of living we should reconsider that determination.

Then I want to advocate to the hon. the Minister that once this legislation has been passed he should see to it that the most deserving cases are accommodated in those villages. I also think it is pre-eminently our duty to see whether we cannot reserve some of those villages, or large parts of those villages, for our elderly people. It is with pleasure that I give my wholehearted support to this legislation.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

As hon. members know, in terms of the principal Act control is being exercised over the actions of commission agents, i.e. persons who, for a commission, sell fresh fruit and vegetables on behalf of other persons. The principal Act provides, inter alia, that as from a date to be promulgated by proclamation commission agents shall be obliged to keep trust accounts in which the proceeds of such produce shall be deposited.

In order to give commission agents sufficient time for making the necessary adjustments after the commencement of the principal Act, which heralded an entirely new set-up, the promulgation of such a proclamation was kept back for a while. However, in 1972 the necessary proclamation was promulgated, which will make the keeping of trust accounts, as contemplated in the Act, compulsory as from 1st November, 1973.

It appears to be necessary, however, to effect certain amendments to the relevant provision in the principal Act in order to render effective the introduction and administration of trust accounts and the control over them by the Secretary for Agricultural Economics and Marketing. These, as well as essential consequential amendments, constitute the gist of this Bill.

The possibility exists that certain local authorities will be prepared to apply to their markets, in consultation with the commission agents, an alternative method of settlement by paying the proceeds of the produce directly to the principals. In order to legalize such a procedure, if such cases should become a reality, the necessary provision has been made in this Bill. This has the effect that certain provisions of the Act will have to be suspended in respect of such agents and made applicable to the relevant local authority.

Cases have also occurred where a group of producers have joined hands as a farmers’ association in order to bring about a market for their fresh fruit and vegetables on the basis of a retail business. Although this type of business is at present subject to the provisions of the Act, because the producers’ produce is sold for a commission, it appears to be quite impossible in practice to enforce the provisions of the Act. The only solution is exemption from the provisions of the Act. Accordingly it is proposed that where in such a case the commission agent is a co-operative agricultural society, and the Act has in the Minister’s opinion a restrictive effect on the system of sale in question, the Act shall not apply with reference to such business. No new principle is involved since co-operative agricultural societies are already enjoying certain exemptions in respect of commission-agent business with their members.

For the rest, a number of amendments are proposed for the purpose of smartening up the principal Act.

I should like to mention that interested organizations such as Organized Agriculture, the Institute of Market Agents of South Africa, the Institute of Market Masters and the Commission for Fresh Produce Markets were taken fully into consultation and that they support the amendments whole-heartedly.

Mr. Speaker, this side of the House has no objection to the Second Reading of this Bill being passed, for the reasons which were also mentioned by the hon. the Minister. We see in this Bill, in the first instance, a measure for protecting the farmer. Along with the Minister we believe that that person who sells his produce on markets through commission agents, must be protected at all times. In this case we see, therefore, that where the possibility exists that a farmer’s financial position may be affected as a result of a commission agent not being able to meet his commitments, steps will now be taken in order that the Secretary for the Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing may intervene in good time. For that reason we agree with the main object of this measure, namely to restrict the commission agents to such an extent through their trust accounts that the interests of the farmer will be protected at all times. Section 14(2)(a) of the principal Act is being amended by clause 4, where the period of seven business days is changed to a “prescribed” period, and we believe that this is being done in accordance with the wishes of the farmers concerned. It just strikes one as being peculiar that there are some farmers who are prepared to receive a settlement of their statement only after a month or so. As far as my information goes, most farmers are anxious for such settlement to take place as soon as possible. If this facilitates the administration of an agriculturist’s own position, I too see the necessity for this amendment. Other than that there is absolutely nothing in this legislation which we can criticize, and we therefore want to congratulate the department and the hon. the Minister on this smartening-up legislation which is now being introduced.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to explain the peculiarity to which the hon. member has just referred, namely that the farmer has to wait for a month before receiving his cheque. This happens at the end of the financial year when a farmer has made a good profit and is going to pay too much in tax. In such cases we find that there are farmers who want to wait for a while before they receive their cheques in order to balance things out to a certain extent. I thank the hon. member for supporting this Bill.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move pursuant to Standing Order No. 25—

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for having given me the opportunity to raise in this Chamber an issue which is causing grave concern to a growing section of our community. I refer here to the subject under discussion, which is the harassment and exploitation of tenants of flats by unscrupulous landlords.

I want to say right away that this is not a party political issue, because I believe it affects hundreds upon hundreds of tenants who support both sides of the House. I want to say, too, that although at the moment it is prevalent in Johannesburg, the activities to which I refer are spreading and if they are not stopped, they will soon encompass all the major cities of South Africa. I think I should in all fairness say that all landlords are not guilty of the charges I am making here. There are very many of them who are decent, honest citizens who see the provision of low-cost housing as a legitimate financial investment, whose treatment of tenants is kind and humane and who are rendering a useful service to our community.

We also have as members of this House a right, the so-called privilege of Parliament. I feel that this is a right we exercise very infrequently and with due circumspection. From time to time public interest, I believe, demands that this right be used and I propose to do this this afternoon. Although there are a number of landlords and property owners who are guilty of the kind of activity which we will raise, there is one in particular who has earned for himself the opprobrium of very many people and who seems to be engaged in a kind of racket that is reminiscent of Chicago in the hey-day of gangsterdom. The man I am referring to is called Chain Kalman Wainer. I want to make quite clear that certain of our newspapers played a very prominent role in exposing the activities of this particular individual. I refer here more particularly to the Sunday Express and The Star. From these papers we have built up a picture of what is happening. I might mention that the particular individual to whom I referred was apparently the owner or part-owner of an organization called Porter Christmas Club. This club contains 35 branches, and the information we have is that in 1969 the interest in this organization was sold by way of a share transaction. The total share value of the amount in question at the time came to something in excess of R5 million. Apparently Mr. Wainer is a very wealthy man, but from what one can see he wants to become even more wealthy still. It seems as if greed knows no bounds.

The particular individual I am referring to is specializing at the moment in the buying of blocks of flats.

I should like to draw the hon. member’s attention to the fact that according to newspapers there is a case pending against the gentleman he mentioned a moment ago.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I understand that this case has been deferred. There are cases pending all the time against this particular individual. The background to this is that here we have somebody who concentrates on buying blocks of flats. And, as I said, at the moment he is the owner of some 40 different blocks of flats. He tends to concentrate, as do others too, on rent-controlled blocks of flats. These flats are inhabited, generally speaking, by people who are elderly and who are pensioners. The modus operandi in this case is diabolically clever. The idea is that once ownership has been acquired of a particular block of flats, there starts a campaign of harassment and intimidation that is really quite frightening. Apparently all this is done within the parameters of the existing law. The object clearly is to maximize profits and to do so quickly. Now, the obstacle in this case is the Rents Act, because the Rents Act was specifically introduced in order to prevent excessive profiteering. In this case it has become possible to circumvent the provisions of this Act. This is apparently being done by relying on the Housing Act, which, inter alia, provides that when letting premises become vacant, it becomes possible to make alterations. The procedure which is followed is that when a new block of flats is acquired, tenants are immediately advised that the owners will terminate their leases and that the tenants will have to vacate the premises as they are required for purposes of alteration. The second step normally follows inexorably. This takes the form of a letter in which it is specified that certain services will be curtailed, services such as the removal of refuse and the cleaning of premises. There is obviously a corresponding reduction in rent as is provided for in the Rents Act. Nevertheless, the purpose of this procedure is really to intimidate the tenant. Because once they know that this property has been acquired by the new owner, then the more timid ones begin to seek alternative accommodation. This then, Sir, is really the whole purpose of the exercise, because once a particular flat has become vacant, then the builders move in, and I think one has some conception of what happens once builders move in and the premises are still occupied by people. You have all the building activity; you have building materials in the passages and lifts; you have an overpowering and deafening noise, and in this particular way people are intimidated. A further object of the exercise is to take bigger flats, to split them into two, to make certain renovations to them, to supply certain basic furniture, and then, where previously you might have had 40 flats in a particular block, you could now end up with 80, and because you have titivated them to some extent you can now ask for vastly increased rentals. This is how the system operates. Sir, ours is a free enterprise system, and I think everybody is entitled to a just reward on his investment. But here it affects old people, who are very often infirm, who are impecunious, who are not in a position to seek accommodation at the higher price levels, and it is unbelievable that racketeering of this kind should be allowed to continue in our modern society. What we are concerned with here is wicked exploitation of the poor. It is true, Sir, that the Department of Community Development have instituted certain court actions. It is true that in 1972 a particular individual, to whom I referred, was arraigned before the courts on 44 different charges, but he was found not guilty because technically he had not transgressed at all.

We want to ask the hon. the Minister what he is doing about this situation, because he has promised us vigorous action in this regard. The Johannes Commission reported more than six months ago, but in his latest pronouncement the hon. the Minister merely said that he was somewhat disturbed by the complaints that he had received and that if there was any transgression or irregularity he would look into it. Sir, this is obviously not good enough, and I want to mention that this kind of activity is spreading throughout South Africa. The hon. member for Green Point tells me that right here in Cape Town tenants are being harassed and intimidated; parking bays are being taken away from them; additional key deposits are being demanded. The hon. member for Umbilo tells me that in Durban there is a large block of flats occupied by elderly people. What the landlord did in that case was to say that the lift was out of commission; he then took away the letter-boxes and said that the tenants could come to the sixth floor every day at five o’clock to come and collect their mail. Sir, you can imagine elderly people trooping up six flights of stairs in order to go and collect their mail.

Sir, there are other issues which I feel are most disturbing, and these include the following: There is a growing belief that some of the officials of the Rent Board are operating in collusion with some of these landlords and property owners. I believe that this is erroneous, Sir, but I believe the hon. the Minister should immediately institute a full investigation in order to clear the good name of the officials. Sir, in another case in which this Mr. Wainer was also involved …

Order! I cannot allow the hon. member to discuss the case of that particular person.

Very well, Sir. In another court case, in which one of these particular individuals was involved, in which in fact he was arraigned on a number of different charges, we find that six months after the court case had started, the magistrate recused himself because of “personal circumstances”. Again I do not want to impugn the integrity of the magistrate, but, Sir, this was most unfortunate because his statement is so vague, and it has, I believe, led to most unfortunate speculation. Only a week or two ago the chairman of the Johannesburg East Rent Control Board recused himself because he said “tenants might believe that I might not give them a fair hearing”. Mr. Speaker, what does this mean?

Quite obviously the answers to this problem are clear. The present legislation is ineffective and inadequate. The legislation should be changed, and there are lots of ways in which it could be done. Secondly, I believe the hon. the Minister should institute a full inquiry in order to clear the names of the officials of his own department, because at the moment they are under a shadow, I believe a case could probably be made out for turning the Rent Board into a rent court with everything that this change in designation would signify. I believe a searching investigation is necessary into the activities of some of these landlords. I believe we should finally, also inform tenants of what their rights are and assist them to form “tenants associations” so that they can get the kind of protection which I believe they are entitled to. But above all else, we ask the hon. the Minister to do something and to stop this kind of exploitation now. He must excise this growing cancer before it contaminates the whole of the system that applies in this particular sphere.

Mr. Speaker, when the Opposition discusses the exploitation of the underprivileged, I have no quarrel with them; on the contrary, we find ourselves on the same level.

I cannot hear.

I cannot speak much louder. I said that when the Opposition refers to the exploitation of the underprivileged, we find ourselves on the same level and we have no quarrel with one another. Exploitation in our society is a general phenomenon. You find it in every sphere of our society. One is almost constantly reading in newspapers about accusations levelled at our most honoured professions in regard to the exploitation of the public which is occurring. But here we are dealing with a case where the public does not have that choice of selection which it normally has if exploitation occurs in the private sector. There is the mere fact that there is definitely no oversupply of housing, but far rather an inadequate supply in the private sector, and more specifically in respect of those residential premises and flats which are available for the lower income groups. There is an inadequate supply; it is true, with the result that one is sympathetic on this score. Then, too, we must accept that there are two sides to every case. On the one hand there is the owner or lessor and on the other hand there is the lessee.

One has to accept that the lessor will want a reasonable rental for his property. He wants to receive a rental which will assure him of an income which is competitive with what he is able to earn on his capital in other spheres, for example if he were to invest in a financial institution such as a building society. He will want to do a little better than that, because if he goes to a building society he does not have all those worries which are part and parcel of on leasing in any case. We must accept that.

On the other hand, there are the interests of the lessee which have to be protected against those people, to whom the hon. member for Hillbrow referred, who are guilty of exploitation. I readily concede that during my brief experience as Minister of the Department of Community Development I have had to deal with cases where there was no doubt in my mind that what was happening amounted to exploitation. In such cases I use the legal means I have at my disposal, i.e. if a building is exempt from rent control and was occupied after 1966 I have the power to apply rent control there, and where I am convinced that exploitation is taking place, I shall not hesitate to apply rent control. My experience in practice is that as soon as officials from my department go out to investigate a matter to report to me whether exploitation is really taking place, a peaceful solution is usually found because I have these instruments which I shall not hesitate to apply when it becomes necessary to do so. I am sympathetic towards those people who find themselves in those circumstances.

The hon. member for Hillbrow told me that I should do something. Sir, I most certainly cannot make the rounds myself and make an inspection to see what is going on. But when a matter comes to my notice, I react very positively and my entire department is aware of this. I want to refer the hon. member for Hillbrow to a case, concerning which reports appeared in a newspaper, of false information which was allegedly submitted to a Rent Board. I think the hon. member knows what I am referring to now. There was no lift, but in the documents submitted to the Rent Board a lift was indicated as being a cost item in an apartment building. Mention was also made of a caretaker who simply did not exist. The hon. member accused me of not reacting, but I want to inform him that my immediate reaction in this case was to call in the Secretary for Community Development and to ask him to go into the question of whether the documents should be referred to the Attorney-General. He subsequently reported back to me, and the outcome of his investigation was that we awaited developments.

I also want to mention another case which has now been disposed of. I received numerous letters and telegrams, in addition to the newspaper cuttings which were sent to me, concerning the excessive rentals which the lessees were being charged. Such cases are submitted to the Rent Board and there is nothing further I can do about it. I cannot take the Rent Board by the scruff of the neck and say to it that I expect it to take such and such a decision. I do not have any jurisdiction over the Rent Board. The case in question to which I am referring now, was also submitted to the Rent Board. When a case is submitted to the Rent Board I have to await the outcome. There is also a Rent Control Board with which appeals may be lodged. The Rent Control Board is a body which consists of experienced people, and I have a great deal of confidence in it. In this case I subsequently received the outcome, and I have the outcome available. The lessor had demanded R75 for certain flats, but he was allotted R45. For larger flats he demanded R90, but he was allotted R60. For other flats he demanded R120, but he was allotted R75. These rentals were allotted by the same Rent Board to which the hon. member referred, and in regard to which those allegations were made.

The hon. member told me that I should institute an investigation. I have received innumerable anonymous letters in which it was alleged that there was corruption and bribery, but in no single anonymous letter—the letters are at the office—was any factual data furnished into which I could get my teeth. While the hearing of the case to which I have just referred was in progress, I told the Secretary for Community Development that I wanted to see the decision as soon as it was available. I do not have the power to do this myself, but I informed the Secretary for Community Development that if anything suspicious should appear in the decision, I wanted him to refer the case, through his initiative and instrumentality, to the Rent Control Board for review, even if the complainants in question did not lodge an appeal with the Rent Control Board. The decision was subsequently received and after it had been presented I did not receive a single further letter or telegram in which the Rent Board was accused of any malpractice or in which there was a complaint to the effect that the Rent Board had acted unfairly.

It is as the hon. member said—perhaps I may now find myself out of order—that as a result of an investigation which lasted for months, cases were referred to court. There were altogether 80 charges. I want to say nothing further about this matter at this stage, but I think that that indicates that my department is not fast asleep. I think my time is running out, but I should like to say something further about intimidation.

Have you ever won a case?

No, I do not know whether any cases were won. I know that there are cases in progress. In any case, this proves that my department is doing what it can. My department, if necessary, contacts the police and the public prosecutor. The public prosecutor has to decide whether he will institute a prosecution. What more can my department do?

I want to point out that there is statutory provision to protect people against intimidation. Statutory provision already exists, but if this should appear to be inadequate, I am prepared to adopt further measures.

Mr. Speaker, most of these cases on this type of action by unscrupulous landlords are occurring in my constituency and that of the hon. member for Hillbrow. My time is extremely limited and I want to make one suggestion to the hon. the Minister immediately. There is a form of intimidation against which there is perhaps no provision in the law as it stands and in this connection I refer to frequently repeated applications to the Rent Board for exorbitant increases in rents. I have sent letters in this regard to the hon. the Minister’s department. I have a whole file of complaints from constituents. I have here a case of a company owning a block of flats in my constituency which applied for rent increases in 1972. They got an average increase of R8 per flat for good reasons. Then in 1973 they put in another application asking for an increase in the rental of the flats from R45 to R95 per month for exactly the same reasons they gave a year before. There are no new arguments whatsoever. The result is that these people, they are mostly old people, defenceless people and comparatively ignorant people, get scared. They want to know why they are being persecuted like this and why they must each time get together and employ legal assistance to help fight the case. I am just wondering whether the time has not come that the hon. the Minister should consider applying a penalty against applications to the Rent Board that can be described as frivolous or vexatious.

I think they do it in England.

Yes, and in our common law provision is made for litigation of that type. There should be a provision under this particular statute as well. If it can be shown that application is made to the Rent Board either once or more than once without proper foundation but merely in order to upset the tenants, there should be some penalty imposed upon the landlord who does that. The requests that are made by this particular landlord are preposterous. I am going to mention this particular building’s name. A company called Dayfield Investments (Pvt.) Limited are the landlords of Dayfield Court in Yeo Street in Yeoville. They apply for the rent of garages to be put up from R5 to R8 per month. As things are in Johannesburg today, this is not unreasonable, but the block of flats cannot with the greatest imagination be worth more than R50 a month, even if it was a comparatively new block of flats and built after 1966. But this is an old building. The application is to increase it from R45 to R95 per month. The letter I have here was sent out on the 8th March. I had an old man here who came down from Johannesburg with the help of the other tenants to see me only yesterday. He is an old man, a decrepit man, who took the trouble to come down from Johannesburg because the tenants are frightened; they do not know what is going to happen. What frightens them most is that the Rent Board is very busy and this sort of frivolous application keeps the Rent Board unduly occupied. Sometimes it takes months before it can consider a case. I know of a recent case in Cape Town where it took six to seven months for the Rent Board to come to a decision, and then the increase is made retrospective to the date of application and these poor people just cannot afford it. If the rent increase is R8 per month they cannot afford it to pay in one sum the amount of R50 and then afterwards the increased amount. I am asking the hon. the Minister to consider if something cannot be done about this. Above all, applications which are vexatious should have some penalty attached to them so that unscrupulous landlords who intimidate old people and young married couples who cannot afford better, should be punished.

I personally do not believe that a body like the Rent Board is corrupt. I dismiss that immediately, but then I am all the more upset to find that because of the activities of unscrupulous people like these villains—I cannot describe them as anything else but villains—who do this sort of thing, reputable citizens of South Africa, namely the members of the Rent Board, are becoming suspect because their public do not distinguish between the activities of people who abuse the processes of the Rent Board and the Rent Board itself. Then you get this sort of letter, and it is not an anonymous letter I may add. I quote:

This is not a solitary letter. Again and again I have spoken to dozens of tenants in only three buildings in Yeoville and without exception the belief is that the one particular operator of this type has an influence which is unhealthy, unsound and corrupt on the Rent Board. I do think that something should be done to stop this nefarious practice on the part of unscrupulous people and to protect the good name of the Minister’s rent Boards.

Discussion having continued for half an hour.