Mr. Speaker, I move—

Agreed to.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a few words in connection with State corporations. In the time when the United Party still had newspapers which supported them, the hon. member for Hillbrow made various statements in which he criticized the State for allegedly interfering in and entering the terrain of private initiative by establishing and maintaining bodies such as Foskor, Sasol, etc. He referred to increasing State interference in the private sector. Accusations of socialism, etc., were also made. Sir, I think it is necessary to say a few words in connection with State corporations and the important work done by bodies such as the I.D.C. on behalf of South Africa. I think that in general one can say that these State corporations have rendered a very substantial contribution to the economic development and the economic expansion of South Africa, and safeguard South Africa against possible boycotts, etc. Sir, these State corporations are bodies which undertake certain projects private enterprise does not, in the normal cause of events, see its way clear to tackling either because the projects are not immediately profitable or there are other reasons involved. These corporations have a service motive directed towards the best interests of South Africa.

Sir, today I would like to say a few words about one of the most important corporations we have, namely the Phosphate Development Corporation, which operates chiefly at Phalaborwa. It is a pleasure to be able to say that this corporation celebrated its 21st anniversary last year. Looking at its history, one cannot but realize the important service the Phosphate Development Corporation has rendered to South Africa in general and to the agricultural sector in particular. It is true that South Africa is known and that its soil is known as having the lowest phosphate content in the world, and it is a fact that 21 years ago South Africa had to import its total requirements of unprocessed phosphate. Then Foskor was established and it began production in 1951. What is important, is that Foskor was only able to show a profit in 1959. In other words, for eight years this body ran at a loss before it was able to show a profit. It is also true, Sir, that Foskor performed a task private initiative did not see its way clear to performing because Foskor had to guarantee the construction of a railway line of R4 million; it had to establish a town; it had to lay on a water scheme, and as I have said, it had to run at a loss for eight years before it was able to show a profit, and no private body was prepared to tackle that undertaking in the interests of South Africa.

Sir, if one looks further and sees the problems South Africa had during the Second World War and also during the Korean War, when we had to import all our phosphate requirements, one is grateful to be able to say that South Africa is now fully independent of phosphate imports; that we produce locally all the phosphate we need, and that we now cast our eyes on the export market. What is more, as a result of these activities of Foskor at Phalaborwa, a new border industrial area has been established which provides employment to thousands of non-Whites. This is an additional benefit which the activities of this corporation have rendered to South Africa. What is particularly important, Sir, is that since its establishment in 1951, Foskor has saved for South Africa no less than R90 million in foreign currency. And at present the savings in foreign currency amount to approximately R15 million per annum. Sir, I may mention that Foskor obtained a licence for the manufacture of phosphate concentrates and phosphate derivatives in Mozambique, which they want to export from there.

Sir, if we come to the question of prices, then the accusation is often made that these State corporations, as a result of the protection they receive, as a result of the capital they receive from the State, are uneconomic producers. I would like to mention to you here that the phosphate produced by Foskor has, on the contrary, shown a drop in price since production began. It is interesting to note that the price of unprocessed phosphate delivered by Foskor to domestic factories, at present amounts to only 60% of the price of the imported product; in other words, the unprocessed phosphate produced at Foskor is 40% cheaper than imported phosphate, if we were to import phosphate from countries such as Morocco, etc. Sir, in 1962 the selling price of unprocessed phosphate free on rail at Phalaborwa was R12-40 per ton, and in 1972 the price dropped to R11-50 per ton. In other words, over this period of ten years Foskor managed to reduce the price of unprocessed phosphate, which it delivers to the fertilizer factories, by 90 cents per ton, and seen in the light of the fact that it is still 40% cheaper than the imported product, this is truly a tremendous achievement accomplished by this State corporation and it is also a very important service it is rendering to South Africa.

Sir, it is interesting to note in passing that last year, for the first time, more than a million tons of unprocessed phosphate was delivered to the domestic fertilizer factories by Foskor. The achievement of this State corporation is even more impressive if one considers that the phosphates which is mined at Phalaborwa has the lowest percentage of economically exploitable phosphate in the world. It is a great achievement for our people who are engaged in such as Foskor, for example, does not receive any subsidy from the State and it finances all its financial expansions from its own sources. The fact that Foskor was not only able to keep the price of unprocessed phosphate 40% lower than the price abroad, but was also able to reduce the price of unprocessed phosphate to the fertilizer factories, had a very important influence on the price of fertilizers in South Africa. Looking at the period from the base year, 1959-’60, until last year, 1972, we see that the price of fertilizers to the farmer has increased by only 5%. Of course, that includes a subsidy to the farmer but nevertheless here was an increase of only 5% in the price of a basic aid to production in agriculture. As against this, we see that the combined price of all means of production of the farmer increased by 25%.

I am sure that if this body were in private hands, for example, we would not have had such relatively cheap fertilizers in South Africa today. What is also of importance, Sir, is that fertilizer has become a very important aid to production in agriculture. From 1959-’60 to 1971-’72 purchases of fertilizer increased by 270%. In 1959-’60 we only spent R30 million on fertilizers, and in 1971-’72 the South African farmer spent R113,9 million on fertilizers. In other words, the increase is approximately 270%. One can imagine the tremendous influence it would have had on the cost structure in agriculture if the price of fertilizers had also risen at the same rate as other means of production in agriculture. Sir, considering the production of calcium phosphate in the country, which is a very important complementary feed for our cattle on our low phosphate content grazing, we see that from 1961 to 1971 consumption of this increased from 10 000 tons to as much as 38 000 tons. I think that one can say with justification that the State corporations are fine institutions which render an important contribution to the economic growth and prosperity of South Africa, and one cannot but wish them further success. [Time expired.]

I am glad that the hon. the Prime Minister is in the House because, although my arguments will be directed chiefly to the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs, I do wish to hinge my arguments on a statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister in the course of the discussions on his own Vote. In the course of the discussions on his Vote the hon. the Prime Minister said the following—

Now, the precise meaning of the hon. the Prime Minister’s words were not at first clear to me and I therefore took the trouble to investigate what he might have intended, because it appears to refer to the redistribution of wealth in South Africa. I went to various sources to see what was actually happening, in respect of the redistribution of wealth in South Africa. It seems to me, as the result of my investigations, that what the hon. gentleman might have meant was the following. I read the sentence again—

Based on the statistics of the Reserve Bank one finds that there has been a remarkable change in the degree of public investment in South Africa. According to the latest quarterly bulletin of the S.A. Reserve Bank for March, 1973, on page S74, where the statistics for investment are given, we find the following. I have taken for my first comparison figures of net domestic investment in South Africa. The share of the public sector in net investment in South Africa—and by “public sector” I mean the public authorities and the public corporations—I have worked out as follows for the last four years of which we have records.

In 1969 the share of the public authorities, plus the public corporations for which the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs is responsible, occupied 47 % of total domestic investment in South Africa. In 1970 the figure was 49%. In 1971 the figure was 50% and in 1972, unbelieveably, the figure was 75%. Now, we are all in favour of greater investment in South Africa, and one welcomes the fact that investment has steadily increased over the years, but what is remarkable, and what is alarming, is that between 1969 and 1972 the figure has increased from 47% participation by the public sector to a 75% participation by that sector I refer the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs to the Reserve Bank bulletin. I could hardly believe the figures myself, so I checked it again and I invite the hon. gentleman to do the same. In case it should not reflect the picture fully or fairly, I also looked at the figures for gross fixed investment on the same page of the same bulletin. The figures for gross fixed investment show that the participation by the public sector, i.e. the public authorities plus the public corporations, rose from 44% in 1969 to 50% in 1972. Now, that increase is not quite so alarming, but it still is a very substantial increase because it means that even in the area of fixed investment the public sector now occupies no less than 50%. In fairness to the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs one must of course admit that he is not responsible for expenditure by all public authorities. He is mainly responsible, of course, for the conduct of affairs by the public corporations. I have looked at their share and this is what I have derived from my studies: The share of the public corporations in the total gross domestic investment in South Africa rose from 10% in 1969 to 15% in 1972. This is the figure for the public corporations alone. In the whole South African economy domestic investment was occupied to the extent of 10% by the public corporations and is now occupied, in the year 1972, to the extent of 15%. Sir, this is a most astonishing phenomenon, which is going on under our eyes, and I must admit that I myself was unaware of it. My attention was only drawn to it by my curiosity arising from the hon. the Prime Minister’s remark.

I wish to join the hon. member for Lydenburg in paying tribute to the public corporations. They do, indeed, fulfil a very valuable role in our economy. They have done work for which one can have only the highest praise. But they also are involved in a whole range of other activities which fall outside their original statutory terms of reference. These corporations are now getting involved in investments in the private sector. Their interests in the private sector are proliferating all the time. I do not have time in the course of this debate to go into details of the investments but if one looks at these figures one has grave doubts whether, in fact, their investments in private enterprise are, firstly, justified and, secondly, whether they bring the sort of returns which would perhaps justify them in some other way.

What about development?

It is quite clear that the object of public corporations is to stimulate the South African economy, to assist in areas where the economy is weak and to help create industries and enterprises in those areas where the private sector is either unable or unwilling to operate. This is common ground on both sides of the House. What is not common ground is the extension of the activities by public corporations to the participation in private enterprise which is already successfully launched and is already making its contribution to the South African economy. What then is the reason for this participation by public corporations, this constant encroachment by public corporations into the field of private enterprise, having regard particularly to what the hon. the Prime Minister has said?

The hon. the Prime Minister has referred to the question of the redistribution of wealth in South Africa. Sir, the redistribution of wealth is concerned not so much with an evening out of salaries between one sector of the population and the other. It has to do with the redistribution of wealth away from private holding and private enterprise towards the State. This is what socialism is. When the State takes over from private enterprise, when the State itself seizes a commanding position over the whole of business and commerce and industry, then that is socialism, that is public ownership, that is the end of our private enterprise. This is what I am concerned about and what the hon. gentleman is concerned about, but one has grave doubts as to exactly what is going on. Are we serious about this? My conclusion is that it is the Government itself which is the guilty party in the context of statement made by the hon. the Prime Minister. He says that he is very concerned. So are we. But if socialism is creeping in in South Africa, if our economy is being socialized, if these allegations are true, then it is fair to say that in the South African context it is the hon. the Prime Minister himself who is Karl Marx and it is the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs and his colleagues who are the Marx Brothers.

Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Von Brandis has an exaggerated fear of the excellent role played by State corporations in South Africa. It was none other than his party which waged such a propaganda campaign outside this House against the establishment of Iscor …

That is not at all true.

… that the public were unwilling to take up the more than six million shares which were made available to them. The result was that the State was obliged to take them up. There is a difference between the views hon. members of the Opposition and we have on this matter. The State corporations have undoubtedly played a very important role in the economy of South Africa, not a role from which the State benefited, but the economy and the public of South Africa. Hon. members opposite, however, are pleading for sectional interests. The hon. member for Von Brandis is probably the one who can do this best, because he has been associated with those sectional interests for a very long time. What is the position today? Iscor performs the all-important task of making steel available to South Africa. As far as steel is concerned, South Africa is self-sufficient to a very large extent. In the course of time private interests have made use of Iscor steel. Now they want to pick the eyes out of the steel industry and they want the State corporation, which must get all the credit for establishing the steel industry in South Africa, to be landed with the less remunerative part of the industry. What they are concerned with, is the sectional interests of that small group of people who want to pick out the eyes; it is those people’s interests for which they are pleading. We on this side of the House, however, serve the interests of South Africa as a whole, including the interests of the people for whose interests he is pleading. We protect their interests too.

In my opinion the debate has gone off very pleasantly up to now. What is particularly important to me is that the hon. Opposition has lost much of its venom. In the past they always blamed the Government for everything that went wrong. The hon. member for Parktown, for whom I have a very high regard, is probably a very good economist. When he talked about our exports, he said that the economy and politics do not always follow the same course. That is something one is thankful for.

Up to now there has been one discordant sound in the debate, and that was the speech by the hon. member for Simonstown. His little old fish cart is always in reverse gear. I asked his hon. colleagues please to rock that little old cart of his to and fro, as we used to do in the old days with the Fords, until it becomes disengaged and can be put into first gear.

The smelly fish will fall off.

However, I do not want to spend more time on the Opposition. During the Easter recess, when we all had to rest, I paid a visit to my constituency. As you know, I have the privilege of representing a constituency in which there is substantial industrial establishment. I am very proud to be able to represent such a constituency. I travelled around the constituency and paid calls on, inter alia, various industrialists operating and managing various kinds of industry. I can tell you, Sir, that I came back here with a very good report from my constituency. Those industrialists have full confidence in the economic future of this country, particularly in the long term, although also in the short term. With that confidence is associated a confidence in the policy of the National Party and in this Government, which enables industrialists to flourish in South Africa. One regrets the fact that the hon. Opposition took such a negative attitude on the economic situation in South Africa during the past year. What we need in this country is not only confidence. We also need optimism. It is to that optimism that the hon. the Opposition may contribute by also encouraging the public of South Africa, the industrial and commercial population of South Africa, to make their contribution to prosperity in South Africa.

In the course of the debate the Minister reported in detail on a great number of matters. The conclusion one may come to is that the hon. the Minister and his department have a very thorough knowledge of the problems of South Africa. We realize that there are problems. The hon. the Minister also indicated that the Government is coping with those problems very effectively and is doing what it is required to do.

In the sphere of trade as such it is very important to note that the net profit as a percentage of total sales in South Africa came to 6,7 about 20 years ago. At present it is 5%. This goes to show that through the years trade has so organized and reorganized its activities and adapted them to modern conditions for it to be satisfied with a smaller profit margin, and that on the part of trade, generally speaking, there is no exploitation of the consumer public. That is something one is thankful for.

There is one other minor matter I would like to touch on. This concerns undesirable trade practices. We know that legislation in this connection is being drafted. One would like to see, when the Bill is tabled, that it should rather refer to positive, desirable trade practices. I came across an undesirable practice in my constituency. This is a large undertaking which manufactures a certain article. I do not want to identify them. They have control of the market on the Witwatersrand. A new industrialist entered the same industry. By dint of modern techniques, much improved managerial ability and fine marketing techniques, this new industrialist succeeded in gaining an ever-greater slice of the market for himself. He thus became a threat to the established monopoly holder. Because he was a threat, they had to deal with him in one way or another. The product they manufacture is subject to price control and the big industrialist originally reduced his prices as against those of the small newcomer. When they saw that this was not succeeding, they devised another plan, a plan with which South Africa is not unacquainted. They put an ultimatum to the new industrialist: “We form a pool for the market. Your share in the market, for argument’s sake is 5% and ours is 95%. That is the only portion of the market you are entitled to. If you gain more than 5% of the market, you have to make a certain contribution—this is not a fine in the true sense of the word—to the pool.” What this amounts to is that the premium he pays in respect of his sales in excess of the fixed 5% goes to the industrialist who, as a result, perhaps, of poor management of his factory, cannot succeed in maintaining his quota. Then he shares in that premium the small industrialist must contribute. This is quite in accordance with law; the law does not forbid this. The small industrialist has done everything in his power to obtain legal advice, and has found out that there is no law which forbids this kind of thing. The big undertaking said to the small industrialist that if it should refuse to sign the undertaking, they would reduce the prices against him for a year to such an extent that his business would go under. With a pistol being held at his head he had no choice but to sign the agreement. Sir, the price he must pay for that is more than R1 000 per month, and he must pay it because his business is being operated far more efficiently than that of the other industrialist. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to tell the hon. member for Germiston District that the “klein groepie” to which he refers, are very important in the economy of South Africa. Private enterprise in this country contributes an enormous amount to the national income of South Africa. Indeed the two groups mines and industries together contribute more than 38% of our national income. He should therefore not talk about them in such a derogatory fashion. I should also tell him that the “klein groepie” in personal and company tax contribute something like R700 million between them to the coffers of the State. Mines contribute R400 million per annum and industry R300 million per annum, as against, I might add, R35 million contributed by agriculture. The hon. member must realize that this country would soon slow down to a grinding halt if it were not for private enterprise that keeps the wheel of mining, industry and commerce going in South Africa. He said that it would be better for the economic development of South Africa if a note of optimism and enthusiasm was infused into the economy by the Opposition side of the House. I would like to point out to the hon. member that one of the great stumbling blocks towards industrial expansion in this country, have in actual fact been statutory restrictions passed by the Government. I refer, for example, to the Physical Planning Act which has engendered a tremendous amount of insecurity amongst entrepreneurs, because they do not know whether to expand or not to expand their existing enterprises as they are unable to say whether they are going to be allowed to employ the Black labour which they need if such expansion is to take place. It is very difficult to infuse enthusiasm and optimism in circumstances like that.

The hon. member talked about the valuable contribution made by State corporations, and indeed everyone will agree that certainly some of those State corporations have made enormous contributions to the development of South Africa. I think we are really rather silly when we go into these arguments about socialism versus capitalism, when in fact what we have is a mixed economy, whether we like it or not. We are not a wholly capitalistic economy and we are not a wholly socialistic economy. We are very wisely a mixture of the two. In other words, in certain fields of enterprise the State has got to take the initiative, e.g. the essential industries where private enterprise is not prepared to enter because on the one hand too much capital is required and because on the other hand it is not profitable enough. There are certain other fields of enterprise which should however be left to the private entrepreneur. Most Western countries today in Western Europe and in England certainly adopt what is known as a mixed economy, where the State plays its part in pursuing economic development and providing the necessary infrastructure for industrial development, while private enterprise does the rest. I think if that is kept in a sensible balance, it is indeed what we should be doing in South Africa.

I want to come to another field altogether in this whole discussion of free enterprise and fair competition, and that is the question of farming co-operatives. I would like to get from the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs, who is responsible for the protection of commerce and industry against unfair competition, what his attitude is about farming co-operatives. Commerce and industry are after all his wards since he is meant to be the guardian of private enterprise. The hon. the Minister will know that the Steenkamp Commission of Inquiry into Co-operative Practices reported way back in 1967. Since then commerce and industry have been waiting eagerly to see if any steps are going to be taken to carry out at least some of the recommendations of the Steenkamp Commission. I understand there has been a departmental committee which has been appointed since then to go into this whole affair, and I wonder if any progress has been made as far as that committee is concerned. The information I have, I get from an article which appeared in October last year in the Financial Mail, in a supplement to the special agricultural issue that came out that month. I think some very valid points are made in this article. The main point, of course, is that the farming co-ops have appeared to have gone well beyond the aims and objectives for which they were originally established many years ago, which was to assist farmers in the purchase of agricultural requirements and to help in the rationalization of the marketing of farming products. There was a very interesting commission of which Dr. Viljoen was, I think, the chairman, namely the Commission of Inquiry into Agricultural Co-operation and Credit which reported in 1934. I remember studying its report many years ago. Since then, it would appear that the co-ops have been going very far beyond the original objects for which they were established and, indeed, are competing very briskly with private enterprise. As everybody knows they get enormous tax concessions. They pay virtually no tax at all. In this article it is worked out that, if the co-ops were to pay the 40% tax that ordinary companies pay, working on a 5% estimate of profit on turnover, the Exchequer would be receiving from them approximated R26 million to R30 million per annum. I have no doubt that that shortfall is being made up by taxes paid by the “klein groepie” to which the hon. member for Germiston District referred a little earlier. It concerns mostly, I must say, constituents in areas to which he probably does not pay very much attention. The point, as I say, is that the co-ops pay virtually no tax. They have many other advantages, e.g. they do not pay licensing fees; they are exempt from labour legislation and apparently they enjoy various other advantages over commerce and industry. They, furthermore, have the first lien, for instance, on any outstanding debts that farmers may have contracted. The point that is made in this article in The Financial Mail is that the co-ops have extended their field of operation enormously. They now virtually have monopolies in fields which should be left to private enterprise. The ordinary trader is being squeezed out and commerce and industry are unlikely to be able to go on competing even in those fields in which at present they maintain some toe-hold versus the co-operative societies. I want to ask the hon. the Minister if he is going to be strong enough in his endeavours on behalf of commerce and industry, to do something about the situation. I would like to hear his views on this. I think that commerce and industry would be very interested to know if he intends affording them some protection. At the present stage, according to the examples given here, there is virtually a monopoly in many fields, e.g. they have tremendous interests in the distribution of fertilizer and the manufacture of margarine; they have a stake in the Trek oil refinery at Richards Bay and in retail and wholesale meat supplies; the dairy cooperation, apparently, has an enormous octopus-like grip and today has a great stake in the marketing of fresh milk and all the end products such as butter, cheese, ice-cream, yoghurt and eggs—and also now, fruit juices. All these are now entering into direct competition with private enterprise and, as I say, it is certainly going very far beyond the original intentions of the Act which gave statutory protection to the farmers’ co-operative societies. I would like the hon. the Minister to give the Committee, and commerce and industry, some indication as to how far the committee has got which was investigating the Steenkamp Commission’s recommendations which, as I say, came out in 1967 and how far also the new inter-departmental committee between, I understand the Departments of Commerce and Industry and Agriculture, has got in its deliberations on this very important issue.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Houghton had a long tale to tell about the Government corporations and their functions. Now it is a fact that the things of which she accused the Government corporations are the very things of which they are not guilty. I think that if one wants to be very fair one has to admit that the Government corporations are doing a tremendous amount to encourage private initiative in the industrial sphere. She was also on about agricultural co-operatives. She hit out at the benefits which they were allegedly enjoying. What she omitted to point out is the important function fulfilled by them in times when things, particularly as far as the farming community is concerned are not going so well in the economic field and when these co-operatives have to carry a tremendous burden for long periods. When one takes this into account, one should rather not begrudge them having at least some benefits when things are going better for the farming community in the economic field.

This morning I should like to deal with another matter, and that is the motor industry. Now I want to say at once that it is a long time since I have heard so many complaints about any industry as I have lately heard about this very industry. This is an important industry, one which is important to everyone from the rich man to the humblest and the simplest worker, because a car has become a necessity for every family in this country today. It has become a necessity for various reasons. A car is decidedly no longer a luxury and, it has, in fact, become a very important possession for every family. Now it is true that we are receiving an ever-growing volume of complaints. The car which one possesses today is one of the most important factors contributing to the tremendous high cost of living which our people are experiencing at present. If we look at the motor industry today we find that in practice a tremendous amount of shabby work is being done. For example, a survey of new cars was made recently. Of the 203 new cars tested, representing 14 different makes, not one achieved full marks. It was found that oil leaks in the engine and the gear box were a common phenomenon; it was not the exception, it was the rule. Fault could be found with the paintwork of more than 45% of these cars. As far as the bodywork was concerned, there were faults in the doors, in the bonnets and virtually every section of the bodywork. The car’s tyres, for example, were not balanced either. I mention this in order to indicate that this is not a problem which is experienced with second-hand cars only, but one which can be traced back to new cars. One finds that a little touching up is done until such time as one’s car’s guarantee expires. When the guarantee expires, one could say that it is “tickets” for one. Then one simply has to pay up and, what is more, they make one pay through the nose. When one comes to real repair work one finds that the situation is much worse. In the first place, as far as repair work is concerned, the position is that the spare parts which are used are not subject to price control. Just as there are unscrupulous people in other fields, so one finds unscrupulous people in this field, too, who charge virtually any price for those parts these days. I shall substantiate this in a moment.

And on top of that they are inferior.

Precisely, and that is the second point I want to make. The spare parts which are used are of inferior quality. Now I want to make a very important point and that is the excuse advanced for that inferior quality. The excuse is always: “Yes, it is your Government who says that it must be manufactured locally”. That is the story one has to listen to every day. They accuse the locally manufactured article of being of inferior quality and therefore they can do nothing about it. What is worse, someone told me this very week that he was present when a car was brought in for repair work. The brake linings were removed and replaced by new brake linings. The old brake linings, which were still in a reasonable condition, were cleaned and touched up and placed in that new box. When he inquired, he was told, “Yes, when the next man comes along, we shall fit his car with this set”. This is the kind of thing which is happening and it is not only what happened in this particular instance, because there is more than one similar example. In my opinion the system of determining the costs of the repair work also leaves much to be desired. If one has certain work done on one’s car at the garage, they say that they are allowed a certain time in which to do the job. Two years ago we discussed this matter in this House. Those three hours allowed for the work are usually two hours too many. The job can be done in an hour, but now three hours are allowed for that job, and one pays for three hours’ work, irrespective of whether 50 or 60 minutes’ work was done on the car. One must pay for that in full. If, however, one complains about this calculation of costs and the time allowed for the job, these people place the blame squarely at the door of the Government; they say it is the Government that allows so much time to be laid down for the particular repair job.

If one takes these facts into account, it is not surprising to find that the labour cost for motor repair work has increased by 188% in the past ten years. In 1961 one paid only R2-50 per hour. Today it already costs more than R7 per hour in some cases. And now there is something else which occurs in this connection. A mechanic works on two cars at the same time, or sometimes on three. In the final calculation, all three of those owners pay as though the full time was spent on a single car.

I want to refer again to the question of spare parts. The costs involved here have also risen tremendously. Until a few years ago, the headlight of a car, including the bulb and the protecting glass, cost R3 to R6 in the case of virtually all cars. The headlight unit for a certain imported car now costs R69. Until recently a rubber strip 2 cm wide and 70 cm long on another car cost a little more than R2; now it costs R8. One can continue in this way to show how these costs have risen. All of us sitting here, but more than that, the less privileged voters in our constituencies, fall victim to these circumstances every day.

The other day a fan-belt cost me R72.

Sir, my hon. friend from Boksburg is very fortunate. It cost me R76 to have a few screws tightened in my car. By way of summary I want to refer to the complaints, as tabulated by a certain motoring group who instituted an investigation into this. According to them, the most common complaints were essentially the following—

1. (1) Unsatisfactory repair and maintenance work on cars;
2. (2) the rise in the cost of repair work;
3. (3) the price of spare parts, which had doubled in many cases;
4. (4) the practice of selling spare parts as units, which increased the cost of repairing a fault tenfold;
5. (5) the finish on new cars, which gave rise, virtually without exception, to complaints;
6. (6) the expensive panelbeating work which left much to be desired and which cost virtually 50% more at present than it did a few years ago;
7. (7) the high premiums for comprehensive and other motor insurance;
8. (8) the lack of guarantees for repair work; and
9. (9) the lack of standardization of models and spare parts.

Under these circumstances I really want to ask the hon. the Minister whether the time has not arrived for appointing a commission, a commission of experts, to conduct an investigation into this matter so that the Government may be enabled to deal with these people for once and for all as far as this exploitation is concerned.

Mr. Chairman, in the final part of his speech the hon. member for Springs raised an important matter. I think the majority of motorists in the country will agree that it is a matter which does require investigation.

†The subject I wish to deal with, however, is somewhat remote from the one the hon. member raised. It is a subject which I should like to call “the curious case of the fifth consortium”. The hon. the Minister looks at me with some surprise. The consortiums I am referring to are the consortiums which are selected on his advice, by the Government, to manufacture television sets and their components. We know the story, Sir. The hon. the Minister placed a notice in the Government Gazette asking people who felt that they were qualified to manufacture such sets, to send in their names and to answer quite a long questionnaire. I think he had replies from about 48. These were brought down to 19, and ultimately certain groups were approached and asked whether they would form concessionaries or consortiums and come together for the manufacture of television sets so that the number could be limited to five. And then, Sir, after a huge amount of suspense, ultimately these five names were announced. I shall not mention their names; but they include some of the greatest electronic firms in the country and in the world, and I think it is generally accepted that in the majority of these five cases, there was justification for including them in these consortiums.

One wonders, however, how these five were selected by the Government. I tried to picture what happened in the Cabinet that day; I can only take it that the names of these five consortiums were placed in sealed envelopes so that when it came to a decision of the Cabinet nobody actually knew the names, but Cabinet members were advised by the hon. the Minister and by his department as to the qualifications of these different groups. Sir, as I see it, in that Cabinet meeting there was no difficulty about the first four consortiums, but then they came to No. 5, and there were two possibilities, in those two remaining sealed envelopes, as to whom the fifth consortium would be.

Like a lucky dip.

The Minister was then queried about these two and he said: “Look, the first one is one of the biggest firms of electronics manufacturers in the world” (one must admit that); “they control about 30 of the radio industry in South Africa; they have a border industry manufacturing radio components; they have all the qualifications for training personnel. That is the consortium in this one sealed envelope.” And then the other members of the Cabinet asked the Minister to tell them about the consortium in the other sealed envelope. “Well,” said the hon. the Minister, “I must say that this consortium has actually nothing to do with the manufacture of radio sets; it has not manufactured a single radio set; it has not manufactured a single radio component; it has no knowledge and no know-how of the radio industry; it has no knowledge of the training of radio technicians; it has nothing to do with a border industry and the radio industry in those areas.”

Surely they are not going to manufacture radios.

Then, Sir, the big decision had to be made between those two sealed envelopes, and this is what the Cabinet said about this second proposition: “That sounds promising, you know; here is a consortium that can start de novo. Know-how? It will have its own and know how. In building a motor-car, we have to invent the wheels first of all; this consortium sounds like the right one; let us open the envelope and see who these lucky people are.” And, lo and behold, Sir, the envelope was opened and the consortium was found to be Perskor, to the surprise of the Cabinet—to their vast surprise! Members looked at each other with a wild surmise, and then they began to congratulate each other because, Sir, Perskor is rather a well-known publishing company. I happen to have its annual report here.

Very impressive.

Here we have a very impressive colour photo of the members of the board of directors of Perskor, who are also on the board of Dagbreek Pers. Why, Sir, some of these faces look familiar. Here is Mr. Marais Viljoen, Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, the man who was in charge of television for many, many years. I see here a Senator Jan de Klerk; I see someone looking very much like the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration and Development. Perskor—great manufacturers of television sets, Sir! And here, Sir, looking his usual self-confident self, is the hon. the Minister of Transport at the head of the table, the chairman of this body. Then I look further and I see the hon. the Minister of Information and the Interior; I see the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs; I see the hon. the Minister of Finance. These are the six directors of this consortium which won this lucky dip in the Cabinet—unknown to and unsuspected by themselves. Never did they realize that that would happen. They can say that the selection was fairly conducted, that it was conducted entirely on its merits. It is entirely fortuitous that there were six Cabinet members on this consortium. But, after all, they could justify their choice afterwards too because Perskor is, after all, eminently suited for the manufacture of television sets. After all, these television sets are going to be in cabinets and who knows more about a cabinet than a Cabinet Minister? The television we are going to have is a coloured television system, and who knows more about colour than the hon. the Minister of Bantu Administration? There are going to be printed circuits in these television sets. Who would know more about printing than a printing company itself? No, a plague on those people who might ever say that this is an unjustified choice, that this vast newspaper printing company should not be in the forefront of television manufacture. Never mind that it and its colleagues know nothing about the manufacture of television sets, know nothing about the training of technicians, know nothing about the manufacture of radio components, that they still have to build their factories. They won the jackpot, Sir.

This body, Perskor, is an interesting body. I happen to have its latest annual report here. In this report there is a statement and a diagrammatic and psychedelic representation of what Perskor is. Here you have it. One would expect such a huge company to have some knowledge of television through one of its companies. I looked through the names of these companies associated with Perskor. There is Hoofstad Pers. They will not know anything about television, nor Impala Skryf-behoeftes, nor the S.A. Financial Gazette. Nothing so mundane as financial considerations apply here. There is the Klerksdorp Record—is that a record to be used by a disc jockey on television? I cannot find anything about television here. Dagbreek Trust. This is interesting—

No wonder they win general elections, Sir. Now, what is the solution to this mystery? On what basis was Perskor chosen to be one of the great concessionaries in this new industry? Why was the world’s greatest electronic manufacturer and the greatest electronic manufacturer of Britain, why were these two vast companies excluded?

Sir, this is a bizarre state of affairs. It is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, and I must add that it is actually a serious state of affairs. I believe that in our system of parliamentary government members of the Cabinet should not only be entirely divorced from private interests through which their jobs as Cabinet Ministers might be affected; it should not only be so, but it should also appear to be so. I believe the time has come for the Prime Minister to lay down certain rules in matters such as these. My hon. leader gave some indications last year as to the type of rules that he would apply. One principle that should apply is that in public life Ministers must conduct their affairs so that there is no conflict between their own particular interests and their public duties. [Time expired.]

We are not unacquainted with the kind of shrewd, and I even feel like saying dirty, attack made here this morning by the hon. member for Orange Grove.

Order! The hon. member must withdraw the word “dirty”.

I withdraw it, and say that we are not unacquainted with this kind of unreasonable and unfair attack. We expect it of him. You know, Sir, that wherever there is anything with a slight semblance of Afrikaans, it is strange that he is always the one who is used by the United Party to make these attacks, and, what is more, he continually allows himself to be misused for this purpose. Because we knew him as a previous editor of Die Kruithoring, he now has to be the very one who damns and condemns everything Afrikaans. Here we have it with regard to Perskor’s share in one of those consortiums, but can he tell us now what minority share they have in that consortium? As though this is such a terrible sin, and as though no Minister may have the right to have shares anywhere. I wonder how many shares he has in Fuchs which he could have bought on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange? Surely this was nothing more than an unfair attack. Fuchs also applied. When it comes to radio and television manufacturers, surely they are the companies that met all those requirements. This is not to say that Fuchs wants to manufacture television sets only. Fuchs is one of the biggest manufacturers of electrical goods and electrical components, so why should they not be allowed? The point at issue is not the matter of Afrikaans-speaking people who are involved. Did we not hear yesterday that it was something terribly bad if Sanlam and Volkskas dared to have a share in a fishing concession or a fishing company? That is the point at issue. This matter, therefore, goes deeper. The point at issue is not only the share of the Afrikaner but also the fact that it is a South African company.

That hon. member is one of the people who has become the greatest anti-South African in this House. I just want to refer him to a few matters. According to Hansard of 1972, column 8139, he was the man who said in the House of Assembly last year that this Government was more interested in the erection and building of jails than in hospitals. That is what he said. Is this then a man who wants to call himself a South African? I think that we reject him with contempt.

I said you preferred jails to hospitals but you would still build hospitals.

He is blown up with the mealies which the students fed him.

In 1971 he was the hon. member who started talking in the House of Assembly about the manufacture of television sets. Even at that early stage he came out in anticipation against the fact that it would have to be South African companies who manufactured such sets. If he wants to deny this, I can refer him to Hansard, 1971, col. 7907, where he said that we must have a free economy and that we must not establish a South African industry to manufacture television sets. This is what we have from these psendo-South Africans. As I say, this is their typical, anti-South African attitude: Nothing manufactured in South Africa is good enough.

This, of course, is also typical of the United Party. They cannot even make their own policy here in South Africa. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition had to go to Europe last year to look for a policy there. Previously they even had to get experts from America to make a policy for them here.

However, they are the same people who kicked up such a tremendous fuss here and asked that there should be growth in South Africa. They reproached the Government for doing nothing to encourage growth in South Africa. However, when the Government tries to establish a South African industry for the manufacture of television sets, that, too, is something terribly bad. I want to congratulate the Government on the decision that there should only be 6 manufacturers of television sets here in South Africa, because we shall have a limited local market. What they wanted, was that this market should simply be thrown open so that South Africa could be flooded by television sets from all over the world. In that case we would have had sets of all makes and sizes. After all, it is a fact that the smaller the variety of sets, the smaller the variety of makes, the easier it is to exercise control over the quality of those sets. I am also pleased that the Government decided that there would only be three different screen sizes, namely two for colour and one for black and white television. Like those six manufacturers and three screen sizes, I hope those 18 different types of sets will also be the maximum which will ever be allowed here in South Africa. Let the manufacturers come along with various kinds and sizes of cabinets, but I think that the components of the sets should remain basically the same. I think we have sound reasons for this. But since we are dealing with a new industry in South Africa, namely the manufacture of television sets, I also want to ask the Government to act judiciously so as to prevent the same situation from arising as the situation we have in the motor industry today and which was dealt with by the hon. member for Springs a few minutes ago. That is part of the reason for the situation we have today with hundreds of different models of cars and pick-ups, something which can only lead to poor quality. The more makes we have, the greater variety of parts will have to be kept for those sets, and this must inevitably cause prices to rise. In respect of the components of the sets, I should like to say to the hon. the Minister that I am rather sorry that the valves of the television sets, which will represent about 40% of the cost of the sets, will not also be manufactured in South Africa. But I can understand that since there are going to be 18 different kinds of sets, six different manufacturers and three screen sizes, it would perhaps not be economically possible to manufacture the valves here. But as far as the other components are concerned, such as the tuners, transistors, transformers, amplifiers, etc., I should like to ask the hon. the Minister to have these manufactured in South Africa, and, as time goes by, to afford our industries the opportunity of developing and manufacturing a television set which will be peculiar to South Africa. Whereas a new industry is to be established now, I want to ask that the necessary protection be afforded to the public. When I talk about protection, then, in the first place, I have in mind that each set which is manufactured, will have the approval of the South African Bureau of Standards in respect of quality, and the associated safety specifications. In the second place I want to ask that the manufacturers who are granted the right to manufacture these sets, must ensure that the distributors of these particular sets are properly equipped and have the necessary facilities to deal with the necessary servicing and maintenance of those sets. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it is a great pity that the hon. member for Boksburg did not start his speech in the same way as he ended it, because at least he did put a reasonable point of view with which one can agree or disagree. But when he starts taking the attitude that because only five firms were selected …

Six, man!

Six, now, yes, after a lot of external pressure by a lot of other governments. But when he takes the view that originally five were selected, and that because we object to it, we are “Boerehaters” again, he must stop this sort of nonsense once and for all. Let us get this position straight. We are talking about Socialism in this country.

Mr. Chairman. on a point of order, the hon. member has now accused me of having called them “Boerehaters”. But I did not do that, after all.

Order! The hon. member may proceed.

There is a vital principle involved here, in the same way as there was a vital principle involved in third party insurance. What is the position of private enterprise in South Africa? Is private enterprise in South Africa entitled by right to participate in any industry or sector of industry in South Africa, leaving aside circumstances where for reasons connected with the security of the State, the State has to take the lead, for example, in the case of arms production? Why should five, six or eight, it does not matter what the number is, firms be told that they are permitted to do something and others are not? And in any case, the Minister has no law on his side. He has no authority whatsoever, as far as I know, unless he introduces legislation, to be able to say to people: “You are not permitted to produce television sets or television components.” There is no law on his side.

There are lots of things I do without having a law to provide for it.

This is interesting. The hon. the Minister does things without having the law on his side. The hon. member for Boksburg’s point, that we must have the local industry participating, that I am not going to argue against, but if this is to be a condition precedent when the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs asks for people to tender or to come to him and say they want to produce television sets or components, he should have made that very clear so that every South African firm would have had an opportunity to participate. There was no condition as far as I know that when people were asked to interest themselves in the production of television sets and components, that there had to be certain South African content in the firms interested in the construction of those sets. The hon. member for Boksburg should know, if he does not, that the other firms that are now interested in getting licences, if I can use that phrase, to produce the sets, are providing a very essential service to South Africa on other fronts, because where is our electronic equipment coming from that we use in certain other fields in South Africa today? It is coming from these very firms who have come from abroad and have established themselves in South Africa, firms which are vital for the security of South Africa today. But this is not the point. The point at issue is what the position is with production in South Africa. Can anybody who wants to produce, produce, or is the Government from time to time going to place an embargo on certain firms entering into what is their normal and natural field?

I want to add my word of support to the hon. member for Springs in connection with the motor industry. I talk with a certain amount of feeling. I have a motorcar, a fairly expensive one, because I buy a motor-car which I expect to last me for eight, nine or ten years as my previous one did. Yesterday I had occasion to have my speedometer fixed and I do not think there is any part in the car left now which has not had to be fixed. I have had the exhausts attended to, I have had the silencers attended to, the electric clock has never worked, and the electric wipers have had to be fixed twice, the automatic choke has never worked and it cost me three batteries before I learnt I could fit a hand-choke, and now it works extremely well. The heater in the car hardly keeps me warm in winter, but the heat of the car’s engine keeps me very uncomfortable in summer. This is what we are getting in motor-cars in South Africa today. There is hardly a single feature of a motor-car that does not require attention in the first two or three years of the life of a motor-car. What happens to servicing? I fortunately had a puncture on N1, that main thoroughfare in Johannesburg just before I came down. We in Johannesburg have a very excellent system, because N1 is patrolled by traffic officers all the time to help poor unfortunate people like myself who find it difficult to change a tyre on a motor-car. They helped me and then the traffic officer said to me: “Have you looked at your tyres?” I said, “No, they look all right.” He said: “Yes, but look at them from the inside.” Now, the outside of the tyre, looking from the outside of the car inwards, looked fine, but when you look from the inside of your car outwards, you see that what had happened was that the tyres had toed in and so all that was left on the inside was canvas, which I did not know. I have my car serviced regularly, and on the service coupons which I have with major services, which I have every four or six thousand miles, there is provision for the checking the wheel alignment, and so on. Now, this could not have happened if this had been done. This is the service the public is getting in South Africa today, and I think the hon. the Minister knows it as well as we do. I think the time has come that we must do something about it.

Give me the name of the garage and I will do something about it.

I can give you the name of the manufacturer. I have had it out with my garage, so that is all right.

I want to come back to the E.E.C. for a moment. I was a little distressed yesterday afternoon because I got the feeling while listening to the hon. the Minister that there was a certain amount of pessimism in his mind when he told us the story of how he had gone to the E.E.C. and had given them a little document, and that he is still waiting to hear from them. I am sure that these sort of things happen, but I think he should be a little more optimistic, because I think we have grounds for optimism. I think we have a very good case. I am a little more optimistic. For example, I was told by one of the heads of the agricultural sector of the E.E.C. that he bought only Cape apples because these apples had a quality he could not get anywhere else. It is very interesting that the name “Cape” is already a by-word in Europe for apples, just as is the case of “Outspan” oranges. I hope we are going to get a name for sherry as well. The hon. member for Paarl was quite right yesterday. He gave us the figures of our imports from the E.E.C. and our exports to the E.E.C. We have a very unfavourable trade balance with them. I adopted the attitude with everybody I spoke to in Europe, whether it was British bankers and Government officials, the E.E.C., or German bankers and Government officials, that South Africa is a very strange country. I can probably say things when the hon. the Minister cannot. South Africa is a very strange country: We always pay our debts and always have done so. We have paid our First War debts and our Second War debts and owe not any man. This is the enviable reputation of South Africa. I made it clear to these good people that this was a way of life in South Africa, that what we buy, we pay for, and that what we borrow, we repay. Therefore they must clearly understand that we will never buy more than we can afford to pay for, and that the only way in which we can pay for imports is if somebody will buy from us. This is the only way in which we can accumulate funds to enable us to pay for our imports. I have made it clear to them too, that, unless the members of the E.E.C. are going to import from South Africa to a sufficient extent to enable us to import from them, the result is going to be that we are going to have less imports from the E.E.C. I am quite sure that if we run into a situation where we are unable to pay for our imports, the Government will then, quite rightly, as it has done in the past, say: “Sorry, we cannot afford to pay for these things and are going to control imports.” They may have to do this. So we have to let these countries know that trade is a two-way affair: We will import from them, provided they will give us the wherewithal through importing from us. I think that this is a line that we can take with a certain measure of strength in so far as our friends abroad are concerned.

We have had some discussion here this morning on state corporations. This is a matter we have discussed on many occasions. I want to get one point about state corporations clear and to get it on the record. We have said innumerable times, and it was said again this morning by my hon. colleague, that basically we have no objections to state corporations. The hon. member for Houghton said today that there is a mix in the commercial and industrial world, in the economic world, of state and private enterprise. There are certain fields in which it is essential for the State to intervene and play a full part. We have no objections to that; far from it—we have the greatest respect and admiration for such organizations as Escom, which has been basic to the development of South Africa. Similarly, we have no complaints whatsoever about Foscor, which was mentioned this morning, or about the Fisheries Corporation, which is doing a first-class job of work in co-operation with the private sector. However, we sometimes get a little disturbed, for example about the ramifications of the Industrial Development Corporation, because the purpose of the Industrial Development Coporation was to initiate businesses and industries where the private sector would not or could not do so. It has gone far beyond that. We have had discussions here in that connection. The hon. member for Pinetown has often discussed here the ramifications of the I.D.C. with regard to national funds, merchant banking and the shoe industry. Why it is necessary for the IDC to be in merchant banking is beyond me. I got enough company flotations myself not to need the IDC to help me, and the merchant banking firms certainly do not need the IDC. The same applies to Iscor to some extent. It is now spreading its tentacles, buying up other businesses that utilize large quantities of steel, to make sure that it will have a local outlet because there is little competition in steel today. Now Iscor is going into the iron-ore business. It seems that it wants to get a stranglehold on the iron-ore business. I do not want to raise the whole question of St. Croix and Saldanha again—that is old hat now. But these corporations of ours, which are responsible to no one but the hon. the Minister—they are certainly not responsible to us here—must, I think, be careful that they do not spread too far, particularly after the figures that were given to the House today. I wonder whether the time has not come that we should have a Select Committee to deal with these authorities, so that we could have an opportunity, through a Select Committee, to see what is happening and to be able to exercise control on their operations. [Time expired ]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Parktown will pardon me for not following up what was said by him. Actually I am on my feet to react to a few of the things said by the hon. member for Houghton. I think that it is a pity that the hon. member made the speech she did in this House. The hon. member who represents a constituency in the city where there is not a single farmer, has now made unjustified speeches in this House on a number of occasions. She came along her and dealt with the cooperative movement in South Africa. She spoke about unjustified competition and she made the statement that the co-operative movement in South Africa had gone beyond its objectives. I say again that it is a pity that she made this speech. However, on the basis of speeches which she has made here before, I can well understand that she, who does not represent a single farmer, can take a one-sided view of farmers and farming matters. On a previous occasion, too, she objected here to labour and the wages of Bantu labour on our farms. She tried to create the impression that they were not properly remunerated. She also quoted figures relating to the taxes paid by industries and compared them with the taxes paid by the farming population. I think that that was very unfair. She made the speech and left the Chamber. The hon. member dealt with the co-operative movement and the unfair situation which in her opinion, exists. But this is not as foregone a conclusion as she wants to imply. The co-operative movement in South Africa was born of need. It also forms part of the pattern of agricultural development in South Africa and of the stabilization of prices paid to our farmers. The co-operative movement in South Africa was established to give the farmer of South Africa stability and a bargaining power. This movement has been developed over the years, so much so that the total turnover at the end of 1970 amounted to R1 298 million. Of that amount, R999,3 million was for the handling of agricultural products, R271.4 million for farming requirements and R27.4 million for services rendered. She made the statement that we had gone beyond what we were intended to do and that there was unfair competition. I want to tell her that this is a very thorny matter and that as a result of the Steenkamp report, which was published a few years ago, there were negotiations on a high level. The hon. the Minister and his department are dealing with this matter and up to the present no final decision has been given as to what is to be done. However, we have a dynamic development in this country. It is also true that organized trade is by no means unanimous on this matter. It is also realized that should the co-operatives be taxed, as the hon. member with her one-sided view would like, there would be misgivings on the part of some of the people in our organized trade. If these co-operatives, which, after all, have acquired a bargaining power for the farmer, were to make a full-scale endeavour, things would perhaps not go as well as organized trade may sometimes think. But I do not want to discuss that.

The hon. member spoke about unfair competition. I think she probably had in mind certain funds acquired by the cooperative movement in South Africa, for example, funds from the Land Bank, which co-operatives obtain cheaply, but then I want to point out at once to the hon. member that industry in South Africa also acquires cheap funds from the Industrial Development Corporation. I think that when we discuss these matters, as I said in this House on a previous occasion, we must guard against a wedge being driven, between the country dweller and the urban dweller. This may not happen in South Africa. We as farmers in South Africa respect the industries; we know their value. We know that the development of our country is wrapped up, to a very large extent, with the development of our industries. But, Sir, on the other hand the farmer and his co-operative movement perform a function of equal importance, particularly in these times in which we are living, seeing that this year, for example, we have again witnessed the precariousness and the riskiness of the agricultural industry.

I think that since we are experiencing dynamic development in the agricultural industry, too, and since it is no easy matter to identify and describe farming requirements, one cannot simply draw a line between what is farming requirements and what is not. If the hon. member sees her way clear to doing this, she must come forward with a positive contribution. We on the side of organized agriculture and also those on the side of organized trade, are addressing representations in this regard to the department, and our hon. Minister and his department are continually investigating what can be done about this matter so as to obtain a fair and satisfactory solution, if unequal competition does exist. I think that the National Party has proved over the years that it is not the champion and protector of one section of our population. The National Party has at all times declared itself to be prepared to see to each section interest in this country. Therefore, the hon. member should not simply come along here and relate, very irresponsibly and without any motivation, a story she had picked up in the streets about there being unfair competition and then run away. I feel that we should leave this matter in the hands of our hon. Minister and in the hands of responsible bodies and persons, who can talk about this matter with authority. As things develop and as we determine the requirements of agriculture, which consist of internal and external factors, we can take another look at this matter. We had a commission of inquiry into agriculture, which clearly exposed and identified the internal shortcomings and deficiencies, but there are still factors in the external sphere, particularly as far as marketing is concerned, which must receive attention. In this connection a committee has been appointed at the suggestion of the Minister of Agriculture, which will investigate and thrash out the matter properly. Here we shall also be able to receive a contribution from the co-operative because they will be able to make a positive contribution in the field of marketing and in respect of the further processing of our products. It cannot just be said by anyone that the co-operatives are going beyond their objectives in an irresponsible way, and that there is unfair competition in the country. We must go forward together, our trade, our industries and our farming interests, in the interests of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I listened very carefully indeed to what the hon. the Minister said with regard to his problems concerning trade with the United Kingdom and the E.E.C. We are all fully aware, of course, of the fact that the United Kingdom has been an important market for our exports, and I think many of us have been aware for some time of the problems which would face the hon. the Minister with regard to the E.E.C. It is no news to us to hear that these problems exist, but we are sorry to hear that in spite of all the blandishments, the good lunches and other forms of entertainment, nothing much could be achieved. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to give us a much wider picture of the position of South Africa. We have pleaded on many occasions that we must look further afield for export markets. We must look to further sources for customers. For instance, I think we have neglected the south-east Pacific for a number of years. We have admittedly sent trade missions there and we have had trade missions coming here, but we have heard nothing from the hon. the Minister as to what has happened in that connection. You see, Sir, some hon. members on the Government side seem to find solace in the fact that there has been a great improvement in our exports over the last year, but let me remind the Minister that from 1964 until the latter part of last year there was no growth in this country at all, particularly in our manufacturing industry, with the result that our exports were obviously down considerably. If anything, there was in fact a slight recession. Sir, if we wish to find new export markets in the world, as every country does, instead of concentrating merely on our traditional export market, we have to pay more attention to the development of our manufacturing industry. We have to pay much more attention to the lowering of the cost structure in this country, and we have to pay very much more attention to the expansion of our consumer market in this country to enable us to produce in greater bulk at more competitive prices in relation to the outside world. The Reynders report, which makes an outstandingly sound contribution to the possible solution of this whole problem, makes a very great feature of the question of labour in this country. Sir, let me say that labour is directly allied to the whole question of our economic growth, and more particularly is it allied to the important role in this connection of our manufacturing industry in South Africa, which today is responsible for 23% of our gross domestic product and outstrips both mining and agriculture combined. This is a very important aspect, and I wonder why the hon. the Minister has not given attention to it. In fact, some reports which came out as an immediate reaction to the report of the Reynders Commission, carried headlines such as the following: “Labour: Key to exports future; Reynders spells it out.” I want to tell the hon. member for Pietersburg, who made some rather queer statements about the division of the economy into 11 different sections because the Government happens to have a policy of 11 different homelands, that he is completely off the rails. Let me quote certain passages from the Reynders report; it says this, for instance—

This is a quotation from the report from the Board of Trade and Industries. Sir, I want to direct the attention of the hon. the Minister to the fact that it is essential for a balanced view to be taken in this country on the question of labour. No one is pressing the question of labour here for the sake of a particular section. We on this side are not pressing this issue of labour as an invitation to hon. members opposite to accuse us of being liberals or of wanting to push up wages regardless of productivity. We realize that improved productivity is a prerequisite for the improvement of our whole economy. Without it, our economy must continue to dry up. But for that productivity you have to have labour and the more labour you use from your resources the better, and the better trained that labour is and the better directed it is and the more skilful and efficient use that is made of that labour, the better the hon. the Minister will be able to face the whole issue of export, which is a vital part of our economy. Our entire balance of payments position rests on our exports. The moment our balance of payments position last year began to improve with our increased exports, the whole country became jubilant, and quite understandably so, because for some years our position had been going to pot, so to speak. The balance of payments position had dropped to a very dangerous level because our exports were completely outstripped by imports. We know of the natural tendency and the laziness, which we have seen over a number of years even in the private sector, with regard to exports, because the local market has been so good. I am surprised that the hon. the Minister made no mention of that. He gave us a very pleasant picture yesterday but that does not help me nor does it help South Africa. What South Africa wants to know from the hon. the Minister is what he has extracted from this report, what steps he has taken to make use of other markets, what attitude of a positive nature he is adopting to ensure that he makes his contribution to the general thinking of the country, overriding the thinking of various sections or departments of the country, to ensure that what is important to South Africa is greater growth, which in turn will bring better competitive prices in the country, which in its turn will provide for better opportunities for export. It is a well-known fact that the greater your consumer market is internally, the greater chance you have to export on a competitive basis. The U.S.A. proves that. That is the whole secret of the U.S.A. I had a chat with a gentleman who was in the pin business. He was making a considerable amount of money, and I wondered why.

Pin money.

He was making more than pin money. He said there were only five factories in the world at that time making pins. The reason was that pins were produced in such a multitude of millions and used by so many billions of people that the price became so competitive from the point of view of the consumer that he was able to export it with the greatest of ease. It was one of the most exportable products of the country. That is what I would have liked to have heard from the hon. the Minister in the debate today. The whole of this report devotes attention to it, I can even give the Minister the pages because I studied it with care. Pages 393-397 abound with all the things we have been saying, and I do not want to repeat them day after day, in regard to the importance of making use of labour in South Africa and the danger we are running into with the future lack, not only of managerial staff but also of skilled labour and the difficulties we will experience, despite immigration, to fill those gaps. Surely this is something which I would like to hear the Minister tell the House about. I believe there are many other markets to which we can go. I believe we do not have to knock at the door constantly whenever we find a change taking place, such as is happening with the EEC, something we have known about for five or six years. Members on our side of the House have been to Brussels, the Minister himself has been there, and other members of the Cabinet have discussed these things in Britain. They are well aware of the problems. We were in fact worried sick and so was the whole of the Western Province in regard to the position of our fruit and we were worried about wine. Then we suddenly found ourselves back in Sweden, possibly due to a sensible manner of promoting exports. Those are the matters which the hon. the Minister should talk about, instead of a complacent statement. This is far from a complacent debate. This should have been a provocative debate and I am disappointed in what the Minister told Parliament with regard to his department and the future export position of South Africa.

Mr. Chairman, I think it is time I replied to the various specific points raised by hon. members. In the first place I should like to refer to the first point raised by the hon. member for Parktown, when he referred to these pyramid companies. I see there is a new name for these, and that they are called “multi-level companies”. I think the indication of what that means, is more or less the same. You have various levels until a peak is reached.

To a certain extent the hon. member expressed his satisfaction with the steps taken when we made regulations towards the end of the year before last. Consequently certain of these companies were registered with us last year. I think we have had a measure of success, and that is also how the hon. member put it. He asked what companies had been registered with us with a view to complying with these regulations. I shall gladly furnish him with the names of these companies. I have here a list of five names. The first is Cosmetic Investments (Pty) Ltd., of Edenvale, Johannesburg. They trade, inter alia, under the name Holiday Magic. In the second place there is Golden Chemical Products (Pty.) Ltd., in Isando. They sell Golden Wholesale Products. In the third place there is Lorimont Enterprises (Pty.) Ltd., in Johannesburg. They sell Swipe products. In the fourth place there is Canyon Organic (Pty.) Ltd., in Illovo, Johannesburg. They sell a variety of products manufactured from seaweed. In the fifth place there is M.Z. Sales, Security Buildings, Exchange Place, Cape Town. Unfortunately I do not have more particulars touching the latter company, but it is registered with us.

Although we have had this measure of co-operation on the part of these company with reference to these regulations which we made, we do not really have the necessary powers to take action against this type of organization. It will really be necessary to pilot legislation through this House if we want a greater measure of security. We are at present preparing legislation, and this has, in addition, been submitted to the various responsible bodies for comment. It will probably have to be submitted to them once more. However, I am hoping to come to this House with legislation in due course in an effort to cope with these incorrect selling methods.

The hon. member for Parktown as well as the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens referred to import control. Both members mentioned that notification in regard to import policy should be given well in advance, and that the issuing of permits should also take place well in advance. I should like to sketch the procedure we adopt to the Committee. An announcement is usually made by me somewhere in October/November on the policy to be followed in the ensuing year in regard to imports. The first permits are then issued towards the end of the year. I can also mention that the permits which are applicable for the current year can be used up to the end of March of the ensuing year for consigments from overseas factories. This year’s permits may therefore be used for consginments up to the end of March next year. To a certain extent there is therefore an overlapping period which lasts from December, when the first permits are issued, to the end of March, up to which date the previous year’s permits may still be used. The second round for the issuing of permits is usually in April, and if there is then a third round, it is in the vicinity of August. I think that ought to be a satisfactory position. I want to draw attention to the fact that this is the position in respect of consumer goods only, because permits for the import of capital goods are issued continuously, when applications are made, and not at specific intervals during the course of the year.

The hon. members also referred to the fact that in certain cases considerable time is required to place the necessary orders, particularly as far as certain goods such as clothing are concerned, which are subject to fashion changes and have to be sold during specific seasons of the year. In cases where we are approached to issue the permits earlier than would otherwise have been the case, we always accede readily to such requests. I do not think there should be many problems in this connection.

I think I said enough about tariff protection yesterday evening. However, there is something else I can add to what I said. I have recently had talks from time to time with the Board of Trade and Industry. We have informed industrialists who Want the protection that they should submit applications, and ample use has been made of this opportunity. In fact, many applications have recently been received by the Board of Trade and Industry. Many of them were considered favourably—not all of course—depending on the circumstances. But I also addressed a request to the Board of Trade and Industry to be a little more accommodating in respect of tariff protection. Recently we have, I think, been of greater assistance to our industrialists in this connection than was previously the case.

The hon. member said that I should act as the mouthpiece for commerce and industry to other departments or Ministers, for example the Minister of Transport, sitting in front of me here, in order to resist and to try to prevent it when rising costs occur in commerce and industry. I think it is hardly necessary to say this, for after all we are all of us anxious to restrict rising costs to the minimum. The hon. member mentioned as an example the rising costs in regard to telephones, for example the increase in telephone rentals. It is factors such as these which cause costs for commerce and industry to rise. It is a good thing to prevent rising costs where this is in any way possible, but the hon. member will also realize that the rising costs of the nature to which he referred have to be approved by the Cabinet as a whole, and that we are in fact making a concerted attempt to keep costs as low as possible. The hon. member told me that he believed in the profit motive for business enterprises. He believed that an enterprise should make a profit. That is correct. I also agree with him. Consequently I receive applications for price increases from time to time, in so far as my department is applying price control. If the price increases cannot be acceded to, it frequently means that that company is going to operate at a loss and is not going to make the necessary profits. Consequently I am obliged—the hon. member will not dispute this point with me either—to accede to price increases in such cases, particularly in view of the circumstances which are prevailing, for example that such an enterprise has no control over the rising costs with which it has to cope. The same situation applied in regard to the various departments. They are also from time to time obliged, in so far as these are provided by the Government, to increase the tariffs for various services, and this in fact quite unavoidable.

Quite a good deal was said here about productivity. The hon. member for Jeppes was in fact talking about it only a moment ago. Productivity is of course a very important factor in our entire set-up in South Africa. I think that is precisely as it should be because we have to take the heterogeneous composition of our population as well as the large measure lack of development which exists among such a large part of our population into account. It is indeed, the case in South Africa that a small percentage has to bear the actual economic burden. A relatively small percentage of our population has the mental and physical ability to maintain a high productivity because such a large part of our population are still in the process of the development stage, but I agree that we should try and should make it our task to make better use of the people who are not yet productive enough, for example by training them and teaching them to equip themselves to make a greater contribution to the joint production of South Africa. We have a Productivity Institute which falls under the Bureau of Standards, and this institute is being supplied with funds by the Government. I think this Productivity Institute has already done very good work for South Africa. It is endeavouring to promote productivity. From time to time certain industrial sectors are investigated by this institute, and recommendations are made on how productivity may be promoted in those sectors. I agree with him that this is a very important factor; therein lies in fact the key to great success in the economic sphere.

The hon. member for Moorreesburg discussed the islands along the coast of South Africa. He was very enthusiastic, and was complimented by various hon. members on the enthusiasm which he displayed in this connection. I want to say that in certain cases there was real merit in the plea which he presented, viz. that some of these islands should be used differently, or rather, that they should be used although they are not being used at the moment, or that they should be used in a different way. I do not want to dash cold water over the hon. member’s suggestions, but the scope of the possibilities is not as great as it may seem at first glance. He also referred to Robben Island. Robben Island is of course a very suitable island for use in connection with tourism; the possibilities are there. As hon. members know, Robben Island has in the past been used for various purposes, and I think the possibility of it being used as a tourist attraction, is a substantial consideration; attention can again be given to this matter at a later stage. Of the 46 guano islands, situated for the most part along the west coast of the Republic and South-West Africa, 13 are being used for the collection of guano, while on nine seals are being exploited. Many of these 46 islands of which mention was made consist simply of rocks. There is no vegetation; nor are there any seals, and perhaps very few birds. Many of these islands are rather inacessible, and if one wants to allow development to take place there it will create problems, in regard to the water supply, for example.

Consequently there are considerable problems associated with these islands. Of the few islands which lend themselves to the ideas expressed by the hon. member for Moorreesburg, the most suitable is probably, apart from Robben Island which I have already mentioned, the Schaapen Island at Saldanha, the bird island at Lambert’s Bay, and then the island to which we have already devoted so much discussion, in this House, viz. St. Croix, near Port Elizabeth. It is obvious that if these islands, including St. Croix, should be used for any purpose the valuable bird-life on those islands will of course have to disappear. I think this plays a great role not only with ornithologists but probably plays a great role with all of us because we would not like to disturb the bird-life on these islands. Nevertheless the idea which the hon. member expressed here is a stimulating one, and I think it deserves our consideration. I think we should consider the possibility of making better use of these various islands, to the benefit of South Africa.

The hon. member for Gardens then discussed the import allocations, to which I have already referred and which I have already dealt with. The hon. member also discussed the motor industry. He told me that he expected me to state my standpoint in respect of the motor industry comprehensively here. He also said that he understood that the next phase of the South African content programme of 80% had already been decided on. I want to tell him right at the outset that that is not possible. If he has heard rumours to the effect that a decision has already been reached on the next phase of the South African content programme, it is a false report which he received, for no such decision has been taken. The hon. member asked me to go into the matter of the motor industry in detail, and in addition I know that there is great interest in this matter. The hon. member for Springs, as well as the hon. member for Parktown, discussed other aspects of the motor industry to which I shall refer later on. The manufacturing aspect itself is the part of the motor industry in which the hon. member for Cape Town Gardens is interested. At present there are 16 firms that have the right to manufacture motor vehicles. There are nine factories in operation, and there are two factories in the process of being constructed, namely that of Alfa and Citroën.

We may refer just briefly to the various categories of the motor industry. In the first place there are the imported models that have already been assembled. At present we are granting the necessary import permits for those models only in very exceptional cases. The next is the C.K.D., the non-assembled condition, in which the models are for the most part assembled here from imported components of which the South African content varies from approximately 10% to 30% from model to model. Thirdly there is the case we are most interested in, viz. those models which are manufactured in South Africa and form part of our South African content programme. At present the applicable South African content for these models is 57%. As from 1st January of this year it should have been 57% in respect of all companies participating in this programme. In 1976 the models have to consist of a South African content of 66%. That is the third phase we are now dealing with. At present there are 35 basic models in South Africa, and 149 variations.

I want to point out that many of these variations differ very little from one another. In this way there are for example three or four variations of the Escort. The one has a slightly larger engine, the other has a few strips of chrome in places where the first one does not have it, and in this way there are minor differences to the same basic model. This does not apply only in our country, but in other countries of the world as well. We are frequently concerned about the large number of different models and variations. The concern has from time to time been expressed here by, inter alia, the hon. member for Gardens, that this could push up the cost structure of motor vehicles in South Africa. My department has assembled certain figures showing the trend in other countries with regard to specific models. In South Africa we have three models of a particular kind of motorcar, the name of which I do not want to mention, and 11 variations. In the country of origin of those models, there are ten models and 396 variations. From another particular manufacturer we have two models and seven variations, while the country of origin has nine models and 453 variations. From another manufacturer we have five models and 35 variations, while overseas, in Germany, there are five models and 80 variations. In Australia there are two models and 182 variations.

This gives hon. members some indication of the great variety of models and variations which are also to be found in other countries of the world. I am aware that if one takes countries such as the United States, Germany and England, one can expect the number of models and variations there to be greater than ours, for the population and of course the motoring population there is so much greater. At the end of last year, and this received a measure of publicity, I met the motor vehicle manufacturers. We held talks in Pretoria on the large number of models and variations which existed. I must say that on the occasion when the motor vehicle manufacturers and we met, not much progress was made. They are people who are extremely careful about what they say when their competitors are present.

They are afraid of you!

No, it is not we they are afraid of, they are afraid of their competitors in the motor vehicle market. We had a big meeting that morning, and there we sat while no one had a word to say. Later things did start to liven up a little and we then decided that Mr. Du Plessis, the Secretary for Industries, would meet the various motor vehicle manufacturers separately in an attempt to put our standpoint to them in regard to the sifting out of models. The standpoint of the motor industry has always been that there will be an automatic sifting out by the market mechanicms. We have heard this in the past, and we are still hearing it. They say that we should continue in this way.

However, I want to hasten to say that at the moment no decision has yet been taken in regard to a fourth phase. I put it to them that when we reach the end of the third phase, that is when we reach the 66% South African content in 1976, there should be a breathing space. We will then mark time for a while and wait until we begin with the fourth phase. In all probability we can regard this breathing space which I have mentioned as the fourth phase. Subsequently we will then be able to proceed with the fifth phase, and so on. Our ultimate goal is undoubtedly to keep on raising the South African content until we are eventually perhaps able to reach the level of a South African content of 90% and more. I took the trouble to obtain figures in regard to the costs of our motor vehicles, and it would seem to me as though our motor vehicles in South Africa are not so very expensive when the prices are compared with those in other countries. I may perhaps mention a few figures to hon, members which will illustrate this. Australia is frequently held up to us as the country which we should regard as an example. The Fiat 128 costs R1 999 in this country, while it costs R2 730 in Australia. The Cortina 1600 costs R2 315 here, while it costs R2 502 in Australia. The Datsun 1600 costs R2 485 here, while it costs R2 400 in Australia; in other words, it is a little cheaper there.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? By “cost”, do you imply the retail selling price or the cost to the manufacturer?

When I refer to the cost I mean the selling price before tax. We find that ratio throughout, and I do not think that I want to elaborate on this any further. I think that this gives the hon. member for Gardens some indication of what our intentions are in regard to the motor industry.

The hon. member also referred to Persian carpets. He said that it was a swindle. It is a swindle, and we are aware of it. Carpets are being sold under the pretext that they are Persian carpets, and advertisements are being placed which, as the hon. member indicated here, do not reflect the truth. We are aware of this, and we are trying to take steps to counteract this practice. We are hoping to make provision for practices of this kind, particularly in regard to advertisements which do not reflect the truth, in the legislation I mentioned a moment ago.

The hon. member for Vasco referred to the Bureau at Stellenbosch. I want to give an undertaking that we will consider making a donation to that Bureau. I must of course bear in mind, and warn, that there are other universities as well which have comparable undertakings, and that one could very easily find oneself in hot water. The hon. member raised a good idea when he proposed that when factories and business enterprises are established in the homelands, the local community should be given an interest in these by way of shareholding. I think that is quite correct, and that it will teach the people that they have an interest in the enterprise which has been established in their area and so that they, as the hon. member said, can in that way become accustomed to the capitalistic system. But there is in fact nothing prohibiting this, so that enterprises established there can adopt the necessary course.

The hon. member for Pietersburg referred to the economy and the relations between the various Bantu areas that are in due course going to receive political independence, and ourselves. All that I can add to that is what was said so many times by the late Dr. Verwoerd, viz. that the policy of this Government is aimed at eventual total political independence for these areas, which is linked to economic interdependence. In other words, each will have its separate economy, but it would be foolish for us to think that there will not be mutual economic interdependence between us and the various independent states.

The hon. member for Simonstown wrote me a letter and told me that he could unfortunately not be present here. He has to hold a meeting tonight at Kokstad. Why he is still going to hold a meeting there I do not know. I do not think it will benefit him in any way. I doubt whether it will make any difference to the election results. Be that as it may, he apologized, and I accept his apology. We had a very interesting discussion, a sober discussion here yesterday, but unfortunately the hon. member then introduced an unpleasant element into the debate. I should have liked to have spoken to him in harsher terms if he had been present here today, but in his absence I want to moderate my attitude towards him. I simply cannot understand why the hon. member is always looking for something underhand, or wicked, or sinister. I want to tell the hon. member that if he expects things of this kind, he need not look for it in me. As my father always used to say, he is looking for sausage in a dog’s kennel; he will not find any there. The kind of thing he is looking for, he will not find there. All that he is doing with all this is to give me an indication that if the U.P. were in power and he had anything to do with concessions of this kind, he would give them only to U.P. supporters, for at the moment he is objecting to every Nationalist or Afrikaner who receives an interest in our wealth.

No, he was not talking about Afrikaners.

Why should it not happen? Why does he not talk about the Bloombergs, the Ovenstones and the Silbermans, and those people who have major fishing interests? No, that is nothing. What he wants apparently is that the Bloombergs, the Silbermans, the Ovenstones and the Shapiros, who had a very great interest in the fishing industry, should have everything and that the Afrikaner should have nothing. Apparently that is his approach. Be that as it may, Sir, I should like to reply briefly to the few questions he put here. He made a long speech. He had three opportunities of 10 minutes each to speak. Inter alia, he then made an issue of it that a so-called “Westies”, a firm, had supposedly been wronged by this consortium in which Volkskas, General Mining, Federale Volksbeleggings and Sanlam is involved. Sir, I do not know what happened there. That is his business, but the inference I make, and this is one I made previously, is that he is constantly allowing himself to be a stooge for someone. He only raised this matter yesterday because he is again being a stooge for someone. I know for whom it is, but it would not be fair of me to mention the person’s name here today, and for that reason I am not doing so. As I said, I know for whom he is being a stooge on this occasion. I have no interest in the relations within that company. It is not my business, nor is it the business of this Parliament. If someone has been wronged, he must go to court. But I do not believe that organizations such as Sanlam, Volkskas, General Mining and Federale Volksbelegging, with the images they have, would do anything dishonest or unfair towards any person, and I am sorry to say that I believe it even less if the hon. member for Simonstown says it. But the point in regard to which the hon. member put a question to me is the fact that Sarusas eventually received a quota of 55 000 tons per year, and that it was exempted from certain obligations it had had in respect of the development of Möwe Bay; he put a question to me in that regard, and he then asked me why we had given Sarusas that quota of 55 000 tons; why we had not cancelled the quota entirely. The second question which he put to me was this: If the development of Möwe Bay is again proceeded with, will Sarusas again have to pay for it. The third question he put to me—and I think he said this was the 64 million dollar question, but in his Hansard it is stated as “64 000”—what became of the money which was in the trust fund, and I should like to reply briefly to these questions. Prior to two years ago the position in Walvis Bay was that there were nine quotas of 90 000 tons each, i.e. 810 000 tons. There were two quotas for the development of the white fish industry, 20 400 tons; then there were the two Sarusas quotas of 90 000 tons each of which one had been suspended, to which he referred, then there were 10 research quotas of 6 000 tons each, i.e. 60 000 tons, and then there were anchovy quotas of 96 000 tons. In other words, the quotas which existed amounted to 1 076 400 tons. These quotas of Sarusas, to which I have just referred and to which he also referred, were allocated to Sarusas on the basis of the Odendaal Commission report, and also on the basis of the Du Plessis Commission report, and these are the only quotas which have ever been allocated, in South Africa in regard to which there was a quid pro quo; when it was said: “This quota is being allocated to you, but you must do something for it; you must develop Möwe Bay with the revenue you are going to receive from this quota, and a factory should subsequently be erected at Möwe Bay, once it has been developed.” But what is even more, Mr. Chairman, is that the distribution of this quota is probably a better one than in the case of the distribution of any quota ever allocated before. Where could one find a better distribution in an interest than when one has involved Volkskas, General Mining, Federale Volksbeleggings, and Sanlam? Where could one find a better distribution of interests than to involve all these major organizations? I do not think any allocation has ever been made in the past where there was such a wide distribution of interests. But in due course, as we saw that there was concern in regard to the fishing resources in South-West Africa, we became concerned and felt that certain of the quotas should be reduced. You are also aware of the fact that there were two factory ships, i.e. the Willem Barendsz and the Suiderkruis. Initially the catches of the factory ships were limited to 570 000 tons. Then, in 1970, the 60 000 ton quota for research was cancelled, and the factory ship catches were also limited to 500 000 tons. You will realize that this 500 000 of the factory ships was a tremendous slice of the cake, and that this pushed up the total of our catches in South-West Africa tremendously. Over and above that it was felt that the utilization of the available fish by means of the factory ships did not take place as economically as when it was done by land-based factories. For that reason it was felt that a change should be effected in respect of these factory ships, particularly, too, because there were considerable problems and difficulties in that sphere concerning the violation of the factory ships of areas outside the territorial waters which had been demarcated for them. A measure of uneasiness arose in regard to the fishing resources, which showed signs of being over-exploited. We were very concerned about that and felt that we should restrict these quotas in order to protect the resources there. In addition it was found, as a result of research, that the area around Möwe Bay, some distance to the north of Walvis Bay, was apparently the breeding ground of the fish. For that reason it was in due course felt that this development and the situation of a factory and catches in the vicinity of Möwe Bay should preferably be eliminated. For that reason work was done on the restriction of these quotas. The present Minister of Community Development was at the time the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs, and he conducted the negotiations with the Suiderkruis, the Willem Barendsz, and with Sarusas. He was in constant contact with me, and I was the responsible Minister at the beginning of last year who went to the Cabinet to have these decisions carried out. In the negotiations with the two factory ships it was subsequently decided that in the place of their quotas they would each receive a land-based quota of 55 000 tons, but that they should withdraw the factory ships, which as I said a moment ago caught up to 500 000 tons per annum, from those waters entirely. At this stage I want to put the following question to the hon. member for Simonstown. If it had supposedly been wrong of us to have given Sarusas something in the place of what they had, then surely it should also have been wrong to have given the Willem Barendsz, in regard to which the negotiations were with the Silbermans, something in return for what they had had. If the hon. member thinks that such a valuable asset which has been made available to a company and in which that company sees an exceptional economic future can simply be cancelled and taken away from it, as he suggested we should have done in the case of Sarusas, then surely it should also have been done in the case of the two factory ships. But it was part of the overall scheme that the factory ships should each receive land-based quotas of 55 000 tons each. We then decided to negotiate with Sarusas as well, and we wanted to reduce its quota, which had been allocated to it previously, and at the same time we were prepared to relieve it of the obligations it had had at Möwe Bay. For that reason we negotiated with it, and eventually decided that Sarusas should also receive a land-based quota of 55 000 tons at Walvis Bay instead of the considerably larger quota it had previously had, and that it be relieved of the obligation it had had at Möwe Bay. You will realize, Sir, that the privileges which it had, together with its responsibilities at Möwe Bay, were tremendous. Its obligations were to develop Möwe Bay and to build a harbour, a landing strip, roads, etc., there. When that had been done it would have been able to build its factory there, and the future prospects of the entire enterprise would have been tremendous. Instead we then reduced its quota to 55 000 tons, and relieved it of its obligation at Möwe Bay. That is a reply to the first two questions put to me by the hon. member. He then said the third and important question, the 64 million dollar question, was what became of the money that had been in the trust fund. This trust fund, established at that time, is under the chairmanship of Mr. Du Plessis, Secretary for Industries. The money that was in the trust fund, was used for development. After these negotiations had taken place and had been disposed of, there was still money left in the trust fund. At the moment there is R648 000 in the trust fund. I do not know who he thinks stole that money, or whether he thinks it was given to members of the National Party. However, it was decided that the money remaining in the trust fund, the amount of R648 000 still remaining in it at the moment, should be utilized for research in the fishing industry in the territory of South-West Africa. That money is invested at the moment, and as it becomes available it will be paid over to the department and used for research in that territory. That is the entire story, and I think with that the matter has been disposed of. There was nothing wicked about it, and nothing underhand was done. Everything was done by way of negotiations with the various parties involved in this enterprise. The hon. member ought to have known that.

However, the hon. member is not the only person who is concerned about the fishing industry today. Everyone is reasonably satisfied that things are going well with the industry. I may say that at the moment things are going very well with the industry. Last year was a record year for the fishing industry. Yesterday, he again quoted Dr. Lochner. I do not want to throw Dr. Lochner’s theories overboard entirely, but if I look at last year’s results and the forecasts for this year, then I cannot attach much value to his theories. Up to 22nd April this year the catches in South-West Africa totalled 165 000 tons. Last year, which was an exceptionally good year, the catches for the corresponding period amounted to 117 000 tons. In the Republic things are going equally well. In the Republic the season begins earlier of course, and up to 30th April of this year the catches totalled 266 000 tons. For the corresponding period last year this figure was only 191 000 tons. I must consequently say that things are going exceptionally well with the fishing industry.

The hon. member objected to, and expressed concern, at the catches and said that we were over-exploiting the resources. Last year we made an original concession of 33⅓% for sardines on the quotas of the various factories. We subsequently raised it to a certain extent, and this year we made a concession that 50% of the quota will apply for sardines. The arrangement with the factory is that they may catch 50% of their quota as sardines, and the rest of the quota may be other fish. However, when they have already caught so many sardines that this comprises 50% of their quotas, that has to be the end of their catching period. In view of last year’s good season we raised the quota for this year a little and all the prospects are there—everyone who knows says this—that this season will probably be the best fishing season the factories have ever had in South Africa.

But Dr. Lochner said that it could be expected that we would get that kink in the graph.

Well, if we had listened to him, we would not have caught fish at all this year.

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

Mr. Chairman, I disposed of the points raised by the hon. member for Simonstown a while ago. I should like to refer next to the hon. member for Omaruru. He raised one matter in regard to which he expressed concern, and in regard to which I should also like to express my concern. This is the question of the dumping of fish in the Walvis Bay area. We are particularly concerned about this. As he explained it sometimes happens that boats go out to catch fish and that they sometimes find fish in their nets which they did not intend catching. Those fish, which are already dead, are then dumped, and the fish then go to waste. I sincerely hope that the concern which we feel for this matter will be conveyed to the fishermen and to the skippers at Walvis Bay, and also to the factories. A thing like this cannot under any circumstances be allowed, and if I can lay my hands on anyone responsible for dumping fish, such a person will certainly be severely dealt with. We will, quite probably, have to consider withdrawing such a skipper’s licence, or taking similar steps, but we certainly cannot allow tons and tons of good fish to go waste in this way.

The hon. member for Karas referred to harbours, and presented a plea to the effect that these harbours should not merely be used as fishing harbours, but for other purposes as well. The hon. member is of course aware of the fact that as soon as these harbours are earmarked for other purposes, and used in that way, they no longer falls within the limits of my jurisdiction. As far as fishing harbours are concerned, we are of course doing everything possible to improve the harbours as far as our financial means allow.

The hon. member for Vanderbijlpark, who is an expert on iron and steel, of course discussed the steel industry. He expressed his opinion on where he thinks the new steel works for the processing of our ore should be situated. I appreciate the opinions he expressed on that score.

The hon. member for Constantia raised certain matters, and the two notes I made here read as follows: “Extending export allowances to service industries for invisible exports” and “Spending abroad on tourism should be included”. I should like to inform the hon. member that provision has already been made for assistance to the rendering of services outside this country, and exports of that kind. But this assistance is intended more specifically for major engineering enterprises rendering services in other parts of the world. The hon. member is probably aware of the fact that where engineering services are rendered in other parts of the world, a tremendous amount of preparatory work has to be done, even before such an enterprise is able to tender. Frequently there are major expenses which have to be incurred before this any results can be produced. This financial provision is in fact intended for enterprises of that kind. I doubt whether we will be able to extend it so that assistance may be rendered to tourism in this direction. But nevertheless, I have taken cognizance of the hon. member’s observations in this regard, and we shall in due course investigate them more fully.

The hon. member for Lydenburg discussed State corporations and in particular Phoskor which has rendered such good service to South Africa.

The hon. member for Von Brandis submitted certain figures to us in regard to fixed investments. In particular I want to reply to the observations he made in regard more specifically to State corporations, for those are bodies which fall under my department. I think that these figures which the hon. member quoted were, with all due respect, wrested out of context a little. The hon. member will agree with me that these figures relate to a period when the private growth fixed investment was particularly low. This applied particularly to the manufacturing sector. At the same time they related to a period when the public sector’s investments were particularly high. We are thinking, for example, of the infrastructure which had to grow to such a large extent during that period, of Escom’s particularly extensive developments, of the great developments at Iscor and also at other State corporations. Consequently I want to say that the figures he quoted here were not a true reflection of the position throughout. They related only to a limited period, and as such they were wrested out of context a little.

The hon. member, as did the hon. member for Parktown, also discussed the State corporations. They said that the State corporations were from time to time inclined to venture into the sphere of the private sector. Hon. members must bear in mind that our State corporations—and everyone is in agreement on this score—have rendered a wonderful service to South Africa in specific directions. Inter alia, where it was strategically essential that we should do something, State corporations have in the past come to our assistance. When, as they themselves mentioned, other bodies cannot or do not want to undertake a project, the State corporation has to do so, and render services of various kinds. In the case of Escom, for example, they are supplying electricity. In the strategic sphere, I am thinking in particular of Sasol. Sasol was established because it was of strategic importance for South Africa to have such a body. Then, too, there is a corporation such as the IDC, which is being utilized for the purpose of development in the border areas. It is also being utilized to lend assistance to industries by way of loans, etc. It is frequently difficult to determine how far such a corporation should go, and at what stage it should hand over. I do not think I differ fundamentally from their viewpoint, but in the performance of these services it may perhaps happen that we tread on one another’s toes here and there. Fundamentally I do not really differ with them, and I can give hon. members the assurance that I have on various occasions had to act as intermediary between the private sector and some of the State corporations, in order to determine whether the State corporation should or should not tackle an enterprise. I honestly think that we in South Africa have not yet sinned too greatly in this respect, if we compare ourselves to many other countries which I could mention as examples. But nevertheless I can say that I shall devote my constant attention to this matter.

The hon. member for Germiston District also referred to the State corporations, and to undesirable trading practices, to which I have already replied. I said that we intended introducing legislation in this connection in due course.

In regard to the hon. member for Houghton I want to say that a miracle has occurred today, which is that she and I are largely in agreement. She discussed the cooperatives, and referred to the Steenkamp Commission which investigated and brought out a report on the agricultural co-operatives. It has been some considerable time now since the report appeared, and nothing had really happened yet, so she said. In the first place I want to remind her that the Steenkamp Commission was, at that time, not my responsibility. It was a commission which had been appointed by the Minister of Agriculture. To a large extent this matter is of course in his hands. But it is nevertheless my task, as the responsible Minister of Commerce and Industries, to protect commerce and industry against unequal or unfair competition. For that reason I must tell her that, basically, I agree with her. It is in fact the Government’s basic standpoint that the cooperatives ought not to venture into the normal spheres of commerce and industry. We recognize the fact that the cooperatives played a particularly important role in the past, particularly in respect of agriculture. In that process they ventured into spheres which now have to be deciphered on the basis of this report, and it is not so easy to cause this to be done. However, I do want to tell her—and she may as well convey this to commerce and industry—that I agree that the agricultural co-operatives ought not to venture into the sphere of commerce and industry. Where members of the agricultural sector want to tackle certain enterprises, be it in the field of commerce or in the field of industry, they are completely at liberty to do so, but then it must be done by companies, without their being given preference over the ordinary companies. I am utterly convinced that when one has unequal competition in any sphere, it results in a disruption of the economy. For that reason it is fundamentally correct to say that we should try to rectify the position, or rather, that we should put a stop to this process. We are deciphering the results, and it is not such a simple process.

That is a very dangerous step.

Sir, I have the courage of my convictions to state my standpoint. If the hon. member for South Coast would only state his standpoint as firmly in his own party, it would … [Interjections.]

The hon. members for Springs and Parktown referred to the motor industry. The hon. member for Parktown said his silencer was broken, and the hon. member for Springs discussed motor vehicle repair work. This is really a major problem. About 14 days ago the Secretary for Commerce, Mr. Steyn, held talks with Naamsa, the Motor Industry Federation, and with the component manufacturers, to see whether we cannot effect an improvement with regard to the complaints about motor repair work and the prices of spare parts. This problem is of course a dual one. Firstly there is the repair work itself, which depends on the ability and the skill of the man doing the work; and secondly there is the cost of spare parts. We have problems in respect of both these facets. We are at present negotiating with the organizations I have mentioned. They have promised their support. They have promised to appoint a kind of inspectorate in certain areas to ensure that an improvement is effected. It is a difficult problem, but we will try to find a solution in this respect as well.

What about the parking garages?

No, I received no complaints in regard to them.

Yes, you did.

The hon. member for Orange Grove really tried to be funny today. I do not want to spend much time on the subject he dealt with. He referred to the provisional five companies, which subsequently became six, with whom the Department of Industries received instructions from the Government to negotiate in regard to the manufacture of television sets. That is what happened in that case. Initially we selected five. At the time—the hon. member said so himself—we began with a short-list of 48 prospective companies which, to a lesser or greater degree, were interested in the manufacture of television sets. We reduced the number; some companies eliminated themselves. Subsequently we were left with 11, from which the final five had to be chosen. We had always made it our object that there should be approximately five. The hon. member for Parktown asked: “Why five?” I do not understand the hon. member at all, for they are criticizing us all the time because in the past we allowed things to take their course as it were in respect of the motor industry and because we adopted a different pattern there in terms of which, so we calculated, certain models and variations would be eliminated. Matters did not take the desirable course, but they criticized us. Now we want to rationalize the television industry, so that there will be a limited number of manufacturers with, at the same time, sufficient competition. Now the hon. member has asked me: “Why five”? But surely the hon. member knows why it should be five. In any case, the hon. member for Orange Grove mentioned the fact that one of these companies is Fuchs, and did so because Perskor has an interest in the enterprise which is, as Fuchs, going to undertake the manufacture of television sets. He kicked up a great fuss about that. But it was not really a fuss. He was merely acting. I want to state unequivocally that we considered those various applicants on merit.

What does Ben Schoeman know about television?

The hon. the Minister of Transport is not going to manufacture television sets. A company of which he is the chairman has an interest in the Fuchs enterprise which is going to manufacture television sets. The hon. member for Orange Grove tried to be funny here and asked just how the Minister of Transport was going to assemble a television set. Surely that is absolute nonsense. Surely that was simply trying to be funny, in a responsible debate. I want to state unequivocally that that company was selected after the consideration of certain merits. The various merits which we took into account were, firstly, the capital position of the enterprise. After all, it goes without saying that a relatively large amount of capital is required, and the company selected has to have sufficient capital to enable it to undertake such an enterprise. The second factor is the skill of such an enterprise, and whether it has the necessary partners if it does not itself have those skills. In this respect hon. members surely cannot tell me that Fuchs, with the skilful partners which it has, and with the skills which it itself possesses, does not have the ability to enter the field of television manufacture. The third factor is that we made it our task to ensure that our various trading partners throughout the world were all able to obtain a fair share in the television industry in South Africa, because we knew that that was what they wanted. That was one of the considerations. Another consideration was South African participation. We made it a requirement of course that South Africa should obtain a share in the manufacture of television sets, and for that reason we saw to it that South Africa obtained a share in this enterprise, that it is in a position to obtain such a share in that enterprise if it does not have a share, and this enterprise qualifies in other spheres as well. The next factor which we considered was the ability of such an enterprise, with the plant it already has, in respect of this kind of industry.

What did Perskor have?

I am not talking about Perskor. Perskor is a shareholder in the enterprise. The technical work is going to be done by an enterprise under the supervision of Fuchs, with all its technical skills.

Members of the Cabinet invested money in Perskor. [Interjection.]

Another consideration was the ability of such an enterprise to train staff, for it is of the utmost importance that staff should be trained in the television industry. The next very important factor was the servicing of television sets, if they should become defective, after they had been supplied to the various owners. In short, it amounts to this list of five, and subsequently, through my intermediation, Thorn and I.T.T., having been selected solely on merit throughout. Whether or not Perskor is a shareholder in any one of these companies would not have made any difference in any case, for those five qualified on merit over all the others. That is the long and the short of it.

May I ask the hon. the Minister a question? In regard to television, could the hon. the Minister give us any information on when the Gazette is going to be published dealing with the safety of radio sets …

Order! This does not fall under the Vote of the hon. the Minister.

I am not even aware of what Gazette the hon. member is referring to. It has been announced that it is intended to introduce television in the beginning of 1976. [Interjection.] The hon. member for Boksburg also discussed television. He regretted that television tubes were not going to be manufactured in South Africa. I should like to give the hon. member, in fact the entire Committee, the assurance that as far as this manufacture of television components is concerned we want to manufacture everything which is in any way a viable project in South Africa. Every component, every part — the entire set — should be manufactured here if possible, but it does not appear to be possible. In respect of certain components it is simply not possible, at this stage, to manufacture them in South Africa. Inter alia, the manufacture of the tubes is at this stage something that cannot be established in South Africa as a viable enterprise. If it should at any time in future appear to be possible, we will always encourage and assist it so that this component, too, may be manufactured in South Africa. He also referred to the Bureau of Standards under whose supervision the performance tests, etc., has to take place. As far as this is concerned, I can also give him the assurance that prototypes from the various manufacturers have already been lodged with the Bureau of Standards so that they can test the performance of all the component parts of the sets.

May I ask whether Fuchs has submitted a prototype of a set?

I cannot say with any certainty, but I do know that certain prototypes have already been submitted. Fuchs have already shown me examples of the sets they intend manufacturing.

The hon. member for Parktown spoke a second time, and the only reply I still want to furnish to what he said is that I have already tried all the things he mentioned in respect of what our approach to the E.E.C. should be. There was not really anything new. I agree with him that we can speak from a position of strength and can say that we are accustomed to paying our accounts and that we cannot buy unless we can also sell, etc. The hon. member must not get the impression that I am being pessimistic. We have already been successful with oranges for example. We obtained a rebate on the customs duty previously payable on our oranges, and I sincerely hope that we can move in this direction in respect of other matters as well.

I dealt with the matter of the co-operatives, raised by the hon. member for Heilbron. Now there is only the hon. member for Jeppes left, who also mentioned the Reynders Report. He became a little excited. I do want to draw the hon. member’s attention to the fact that an export effort, as recommended by the Reynders Commission, actually consists of two parts: the part played by the authorities, viz. assistance to the exporter, and the part the exporter himself has to play. The hon. member made quite a number of statements here with which I am entirely in agreement. I therefore do not want to deal with them again, but what I did in fact say is that we, the State, particularly as far as financing was concerned, definitely contributed our share with the provision of R46 million for export promotion for this year. We will in due course consider the other recommendations contained in the report, and we will, on our part, do everything possible. The hon. member and other hon. members should rather encourage the private sector, which has such an easy time of it in South Africa with our easy market here, to give greater attention to exporting.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank those hon. members who contributed to the debate. I think that we have had a fruitful discussion.

Votes agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 22.—“Police”:

Mr. Chairman, I should just like to raise three matters in connection with this Vote. The first is that the Deputy Minister will be in charge of the Vote and will therefore be entitled to speak for an unlimited period of time. Secondly, I should like to inform the Committee that the present Commissioner, Gen. Joubert, is to retire at the end of November. I want to avail myself of this opportunity to pay tribute to Gen. Joubert, as Commissioner of the South African Police for the past number of years, for all the work he has done in the interests of the South African Police and in the interests of the security of South Africa. Perhaps I may give the Committee a few details about Gen. Joubert’s career. He was born on 1st December, 1912, at Deelpan in the district of Lichtenburg. He joined the service of the South African Police on 23rd June, 1932. In other words, on 23rd June this year he will have had 41 years of service in the South African Police. In that time he received the following medals: the South African Police Star for merit; the South African Police medal for faithful service; and the South African Police Star for distinguished service, which allowed him to add the letters S.O.O. behind his name. He became Deputy Commissioner in 1964, Major-General in 1968, Lieutenant-General later in 1968 and on the 1st July, 1971, he attained the rank of General and Commissioner of the South African Police. In 1942 he married Miss Van der Westhuizen and three sons were born from this marriage. Besides being proficient in the two official languages, the Commissioner also speaks, reads and writes Swazi fluently. I would like to mention that I have seen recently of what great value it is, particularly to the South African Police, to be able to speak one or more Bantu languages. When we opened a building in Soweto recently, the Commissioner addressed the crowds in a Bantu language—I do not know in which Bantu language he was addressing them— and there was an immediate sympathetic response from the people there. To tell the truth, he addressed them in more than one Bantu language on that occasion. I think that this is really something to De encouraged, particularly in the Police Force. I should like to express my gratitude to Gen. Joubert for the pleasant co-operation I have had from him. He really did well for himself and did a wonderful job in a very, very responsible position. I want to thank him for the pleasant time we have had together in the Police.

I want to announce further that Lt.-Gen. Theodorus Johannes Crous, S.O.O., will be appointed as Commissioner of the South African Police from 1st December of this year. I am very pleased that Gen. Crous can be present here today and can join us in the discussion of the Police Vote. He was born in 1914 and joined the service in 1933. He has received the following medals: the Africa Service Medal, the Africa Star, the Police Star for Merit, the Police Star for Faithful Service and the Police Star for Distinguished Service. On 1st July, 1971, he attained the rank of Lieutenant-General. It is with great pleasure that I welcome him to the very responsible position which he is now to fill, and I should like to say to Gen. Crous that it gives me great pleasure and satisfaction that he has been able to attain this highest rung and that the Cabinet has given its approval. I have known Gen. Crous for many years, ever since he was District Commandant at Worcester. I learnt to know him well there and I know what a pleasant person he is and how faithful he is to his post. As Divisional Commissioner in South-West Africa, in particular, he achieved great fame. Because I know that it is perhaps the ideal of every policeman to become Commissioner, I am happy that he could have become Commissioner. I want to express the hope that our collaboration will be just as fruitful as that I have had with Gen Joubert.

Then I want to make a third announcement. This concerns the remuneration of members of the South African Police. In recent times there has been some degree of concern in regard to purchases of discharge by members of the South African Police, and as a result of the fact that recruitment left something to be desired. Gen. Joubert and I put our heads together and tried to make plans to see what we could do to improve the position. We also did this as a result of other factors, namely that so much more is demanded of the South African Police these days. Hon. members know that criminals are becoming ever more ingenious in the modern world. Crime, too, is far more sophisticated and we find it necessary to set a higher standard for recruits who join the South African Police. We are aware, too, that the police perform numerous activities which are not comparable with the work of many other departments. We are also aware that physical dangers are involved in the work of the South African Police, as is proved by the large number of deaths which have occurred in the execution of their duties. We are also aware that there are unpleasant duties in connection with the solving of crime, the investigation of crime, etc. At present the Police are appointed on the same salary scale as the ordinary public servant. On concluding his training course, he receives an adjustment of one notch on his salary, and then he also gets his ordinary salary adjustment. Apart from that there is an allowance at present which applies to members of the Police Force and which amounts to R420 per annum after the third or the fourth year of service. Thereafter the allowance is reduced until it falls away completely after about 10 years’ service. With a view to these examples which I have mentioned here, which are peculiar to the South African Police, we have been trying for some time to find means to effect an improvement. We submitted a case to the Public Service Commission, and the Public Service Commission made a recommendation which was later approved by the Cabinet, namely that in future an additional allowance of R360 per annum is to be paid to all police officers from the most junior constable to the Commissioner.

Hear, hear!

We are very grateful for that. We know that from time to time concern has been expressed in the newspapers by ordinary members of the public and by members of Parliament. I just want to give the assurance that all of us are equally concerned about the welfare of the South African Police, and therefore I think that this small improvement will be welcomed by everyone.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate this side of the House with the remarks made by the hon. the Minister in respect of the retiring Commissioner, Gen. Gideon Joubert who, in 40 years of service to his country, has served with loyalty and distinction. We have come to know and respect him as a practical man, a man who has always been courteous and approachable and a man who has always been firm and devoted in his duties, and we are sorry to see him go. Sir, by the same token we welcome Gen. Theo Crous, whom we have known also as a most engaging personality, who has seen service all over the country and who is sympathetic, and we look forward to a most fruitful association with him, as we had with his predecessor, Gen. Joubert.

Sir, one of the other matters that the hon. the Minister mentioned was the desirability for policemen to know a Bantu language. I think that we would all like to endorse that. Indeed, Sir, not very long ago in a trial which received a lot of publicity, a person who was also a public representative was charged with an offence, and in the course of the trial it became clear from evidence upon oath that a Bantu sergeant, acting as interpreter because the European constable in charge of the investigation could not speak Zulu, had told two of the witnesses that they must say that the accused held the complainant down while he was beaten. They said that they could not say that, and his reply to that was, “You must say this because in fact we are trying to make a case against the mlungu (White man) and you must help.” Sir, the investigating officer, a White constable, did not understand that this in fact had happened because he did not understand Zulu. This is one example of the sort of thing that can happen, and I hope that the hon. the Minister will give a reward of some sort—and I think this is provided for—as an encouragement to members of the Force to learn one or more Bantu languages. Needless to say, we are also delighted that the hon. the Minister has announced here today an increase in the allowances of the Police Force. He has quite rightly said that the police cannot be compared with any other members of the Public Service, for all the various reasons that I do not have time to go into now, but which we have talked about before. He says that they go on to the same salary scale as all other persons in the Public Service, except that they will now perhaps be a little better off with this allowance. But I want to say that in fact one cannot in any way compare the duties of the Police Force with those of any other member of the Public Service. It seems to me that the time has come, as we have said before, to divorce the Police Force from the Public Service Commission. You cannot even compare the Police Force with other service organizations or departments which provide services, not even with the Prisons Department. They work their hours, their shifts, they work a five-day week. We had it the other day that when the hon. the Minister of Justice was asked by the hon. member for Umlazi to provide services on a Saturday, the hon. the Minister said it was not possible or acceptable because it would not be used by the public. The Public Service Commission is obliged to relate, when it approves of any increases or allowances, the payment to other similar services and provisions of the Public Service. But despite that, and despite the announcement of the Minister, which I have indicated we welcome, there is still a discrepancy with the other similar services provided in other departments. The R30 a month or R360 per annum, which the Minister has just announced, does not yet bring the South African Police policemen anywhere near the salary-scale of the Railways and Harbours Police, and here is a comparison, not with other Public Service servants, but with other policemen in other departments. Let me say this. There was an advertisement on the 24th April this year, in The Daily News in Durban, for a constable in the City Police of Durban. His starting salary is R207-50 a month, which can be increased and adjusted according to his age, etc. But even with the R30 that man is still miles ahead of the S.A.P. policemen, and I want to tell the Committee that the S.A.P. policemen’s duty cannot be compared with the duties of a policeman for the city of Durban police nor with the Railway Police, not only in respect of what he has to do every day but also in respect of what is required of him in so far as the variety of his duties is concerned, and in so far also that he is obliged, in South African territory, in the Caprivi strip or in South-West Africa, to do a term of duty on the borders. Let me read a quotation from Die Vaderland, which was quoted in this House before in another context. It said—

Sir, this is a state of affairs which must end and which can only end if the Police Force is divorced from the Public Service Commission. Sir, there are many other things one would like to talk about this afternoon, and there are many other things we will talk about generally relating to the service in the Force and to the duties they have to perform. We have had the opportunity to deal with the question of the many people who have been shot and killed by the police. We had that opportunity during the debate on the Criminal Procedure Bill and we will not deal with that now. But the shortage of policemen—and the hon. member for Berea will deal with this in more detail—is a subject of urgent public concern at this stage. If you consider the various duties the police have to perform in South Africa, and if you consider the figures you find in the police report, you get some idea of the fact that there are obviously not enough people to do the job that is required. On page 7 you find, in relation to burglaries on business premises, that there were 32 000-odd cases reported, only 8 000 being sent to trial. In regard to burglaries on residential premises occupied by Whites, 31 000-odd complained but they were only able to investigate and send for trial only 8 000-odd. On premises occupied by non-Whites there were 24 000 cases reported and only 8 000 were sent for trial. This indicates only one thing, and that is that there are not sufficient policemen available to do this job. This is the most important of all—the investigation and the prevention of these offences. If one looks at page 5 of the report, one finds that in respect of robberies of non-Whites by non-Whites there were approximately 1 500 incidents reported and only in 663 cases were someone sent for trial. In respect of theft from Whites by Whites, there were 1 232 incidents reported and there were only 330 cases where someone was sent for trial. These figures too indicate that we need more policemen with more time to do the job of the police.

We on this side of the House have talked over the years about the concept of having a “bobby on the beat”, of having a policeman in the street so that he can be seen by people, so that people are aware of his presence. I have been most aware since we have come back for this session that certainly around Cape Town there are more policemen walking in the Avenue and around the place with dogs and otherwise. I think it has had a salutory effect upon the persons most likely to commit offences and a salutory effect upon the confidence the public has in the maintenance of law and order by the Force. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with previous speakers in paying tribute to Gen. Joubert. I shall always remember Gen. Joubert as a great, strong, friendly and able leader. I also want to congratulate heartily an equally friendly and able policeman, Gen. Crous, on his promotion.

I want to express my gratitude to the Police Force as a whole. I do not exclude one single section of the Police Force. The hon. the Opposition is always inclined, to exclude the Security Police. I want to express my gratitude to the Police Force as a whole for the peace and stability they again gave South Africa over the past year. I want to associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Durban North by pleading that the remuneration of the police be continually kept in mind with a view to an increase, because they are people who perform a difficult task under special circumstances. At the same time I want to thank the hon. the Minister for the fair increase in remuneration announced this year.

It has often been said in this House— however I want to say so categorically today—that no one is as prejudiced, as intolerant and as hateful as an ultra-libera-list. One such person is a certain Bernard Levin who, among other things, launched a poisonous attack on the South African Police in The London Times of 6th April, 1972. As can probably be guessed by now, I only made these remarks to deal with the hon. member for Houghton. I want to indicate how she intentionally supplies material to these venomous writers. On 8th February, 1972, she put a question to the hon. the Minister of Police dealing with the number of detainees, excluding detainees in terms of the Terrorism Act, who died while in detention. The hon. the Minister replied, “42 died”. Sir, this is an insignificant percentage if one compares it with the three million offences and misdemeanours during this particular period. Of those 42 cases the police were not responsible for one single death and one inquest had not yet been completed. Those were the true facts. This Bernard Levin took these facts and wrote, inter alia the following—

The heavens preserve such a “nation”—

The report then goes on and concludes with these words—

That is just to give you an idea, Sir, how information which she intentionally channels, is taken advantage of by venomous writers overseas. I say “intentionally”, because this year, knowing what is going on overseas, she asked the same question again. The answer was that 40 detainees had died. There was one alleged assault by the police, which had not yet been finally dealt with, as well as one inquest not yet completed. Now I ask her: Has she told the world about the 26 policemen— of which 15 are Whites—who lost their lives in the execution of their duties, inter alia, on the borders? Has she told the world about Sgt. J. W. Fouché, who was awarded the Police Star after saving 31 Coloureds under dangerous circumstances, that he specifically risked his life to save one Coloured woman and her baby from the flood waters?

Never!

Has she told the world that under our policy, we are giving our non-Whites more and more promotion in the Police Force and that four officers’ posts for Indians, nine for Colourds and 12 for Bantu have been approved? I do not think so. She is only interested in channelling information of a one-sided nature for the venomous writers overseas to distort that information still further and use it against South Africa. I want to say at once that we on this side do not condone cruelty on the part of the police, just as we do not approve cruelty in a clergyman or a politician. However, I want to say in conclusion that to serve as a permanent channel for this one-sided information for the benefit of the enemies of South Africa, is reprehensible and unpatriotic.

Mr. Chairman, I am surprised at the hon. member for Kroonstad launching this unbridled attack on me. I ask hundreds of questions in this House and I solicit information from hon. Ministers not for any sinister purpose, as he presumes. But the facts are there for all to see and the facts are there for all to use. If these facts get used, it is none of my business. Let me say that if as a result of these facts being used, certain situations in South Africa are duly improved, I think one has accomplished something by airing certain things which the hon. member, and no doubt also other hon. members in this House, would rather had never been revealed. I am going to continue along these lines, because this is one of my duties as a member of Parliament, namely to find out what is going on in South Africa and to publicise what is going on in South Africa by virtue of the answers given by hon. Minister in this House and which are reported by the Press. Thereafter one hopes that certain improvements will be effected. I am not going to be deterred at all by any of these accusations by the hon. member for Kroonstad, who I might say is going to go down in history as “Mr. Smear-busch”, if he does not watch out.

I am going to raise another matter, which no doubt will also be reported in the Press and which will also no doubt redound to the disadvantage of South Africa from the point of view of publicity, but which might result in some improvements in the whole situation as a result of the airing it gets in this House. I want to raise in some considerable detail the whole question of the use by the police of fire-arms to prevent persons escaping from custody and for other reasons. I believe that the relevant figures are really rather appalling and I am afraid they are going up every year. I have here a list of figures of persons who have been (a) killed, and (b) wounded by the police over the last few years. In 1968, 37 persons were killed and 103 were wounded, a total of 140. In 1969, 50 were killed and 137 wounded, a total of 187. We can go through till we get to 1972, when no fewer than 94 people were killed and 299 persons were wounded, a total of 393. For the first two months of this year 16 people have been killed and 79 people have been wounded, already a total of 95 persons for the first two months of this year. I do not know the details of all of these cases, and I have no doubt, and will say at once, that there may very well be cases where the woundings and the killings were unavoidable. If the police are dealing with dangerous criminals, if they are acting in self-defence, if they are preventing someone from in fact committing a dangerous, violent crime, then I, like everybody else, believe that the police obviously have the right to use as much force as is necessary in trying to stop a violent criminal from perpetrating a violent act. But I do not believe that this is the case in very many of the cases of shootings. I can take five examples from this year alone, some of which are included in the figures I have mentioned for the first two months and some of which have happened since then. I believe that the hon. the Minister owes an explanation, and certainly the Commissioner of Police owes an explanation to the people of South Africa as to the trigger-happy attitude of police in attempting to stop people from escaping custody.

What nonsense!

I am going to give the hon. member five examples. If he thinks those are nonsense, his attitude to humanity is indeed very different from my attitude. There is, first of all, of the Elliott case of last year. The young man was shot and I am not sure what has happened as a result of the case. When I raised this case last year, it was sub judice. Somehow I seem to have lost track of this case. This concerns a young man who attempted to escape from custody. He was scaling the wall of the police station and was shot dead. He had been arrested on a charge of attempting to steal a car, or for drunken driving—anyway, it was a minor crime. There is the case …

[Inaudible.]

This is not a crime for which capital punishment is prescribed in this country. Then there is the case of the 14-year-old boy who was badly wounded while attempting to escape from police cells. This boy had been arrested in a supermarket when a burglar alarm went off. Nobody knows whether or not a charge had been laid. There are two stories: The police say a charge was laid but the owners of the supermarket say a charge was not laid. Anyway, this boy was seriously injured while trying to escape. I wonder under what circumstances it is not possible to arrest a 14-year-old boy or to stop him from escaping arrest without shooting and seriously wounding him. I cannot see any justification for this. Then there is the case of a man who was shot in a busy street in Hillbrow. The criminal danger of using fire-arms in a busy street is something to which I must say I take the strongest possible exception. How can they risk shooting at a man in such circumstances? Incidentally, that man was also accused of some minor crime; it was nothing serious; it was not a violent crime at all. Then we had, very recently, the case of a man who was shot at Germiston Lake. He was apparently being questioned in respect of an indecent assault. He was shot and is at present lying in a hospital seriously wounded. Then there is the fifth case I know about concerning a 16-year-old boy who was with his younger brother and an older man— a young man really, but older than this boy, being 19, whereas the boy is 16 years of age. The 19-year-old already had a conviction against him and apparently incited these two younger boys to come with him on one of his car-pinching expeditions. They were arrested in a car park which, I understand, was well lit; the boys ran as the police arrived and one of them, the 16-year-old, was shot and is going to be paralysed for the rest of his life. He is a paraplegic today as a result of this. Although it is true that under the present Criminal Procedure Law the police may shoot for the crime of attempting to escape arrest, our new law, if passed, is going to change that. The police may not shoot for that particular crime, but they may shoot for any crimes committed under Schedule I which, incidentally, includes theft and also any crimes for which the penalty can be imprisonment for six months and more. I do not think that the law, if amended and passed this year, is going to make an appreciable difference. As I said at the time when we discussed this clause—I think it is clause 39—during the Committee Stage of the Bill, no policeman stops to think fast enough as to whether or not he is within the law or not before shooting. Under what circumstances can we justify the shooting of this 16-year-old boy who was accused and was in fact caught in the act of stealing a motor-car? I believe that the whole thing stems from attitudes of mind in the Police Force. The hon. the Deputy Minister very kindly has sent me a copy of the police standing orders. It is said very firmly here that—

is one of the cases in which the use of fire-arms is justified. A later order says that the shooting of persons for resisting arrest, persons who are accused and having committed only a petty offence, is most strictly forbidden. This is laid down in the standing orders, and I cannot understand why these standing orders are not sufficiently impressed on the minds of the policemen, particularly young policemen who might be less responsible than an experienced and well-trained man, that they must not draw a fire-arm and shoot somebody who is resisting arrest or who is escaping arrest and who is accused of committing only a petty crime. Heaven knows we have enough on our schedule of offences to which capital punishment already applies, but by allowing this sort of practice to go on, we are increasing the number of crimes for which people are executed in this country by hundreds. I believe that this is a very serious matter indeed and warrants the most serious attention of the hon. the Minister and of the senior officers of the Police Force to see to it that this sort of practice is not continued. It is extremely bad for the relationship between the police and the general public, whatever attitude that hon. member opposite may take. We assure him that most civilized people in this country are horrified when they pick up a newspaper and read that a 14-year-old boy had been shot and seriously wounded while attempting to escape arrest after having been arrested either for stealing a car—like that 16-year-old boy recently—or for stealing something in a supermarket. These are cases which I do not believe can be justified under any circumstances whatsoever, and I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister will do something about this. I would also like to ask him about … [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that the happiest day in the political life of everyone on this side of the House will be election day in 1975, after which the hon. member for Houghton will no longer be a member of this House.

Are you going to stand against me?

It is just a pity that we must wait until 1975.

Too bad that you have to wait.

If it depended on me, the hon. the Prime Minister could write out a general election tomorrow. At one stage the hon. member was known in this House for preparing herself thoroughly and for making speeches of merit whether one agreed with them or not. During this session the hon. member showed herself to be an emotional person and left the impression of someone who is standing on a roof and shouting into the wind. She gave us the best example of that recently when the third interim report of the Schlebusch Commission was Tabled in this House. Within ten minutes she finished reading a report of more than 160 pages and then declared very dramatically in this House that it was “nonsense, nonsence, nonsense”. Today this hon. member quoted this kind of case in the same dramatic way and accused the police of using fire-arms on escaping persons who have not committed a serious crime. Now I would like to ask the hon. member whether car theft is not a serious crime. How would she feel if her car, costing a few thousand rand, was stolen? Is that not a serious crime if one steals a few thousand rand?

You do not have to kill him for that.

Is that not a serious crime? The hon. member is losing her perspective completely. I think it is time the hon. member went on persion. I am sorry that when one has ten minutes to speak and would like to debate his speech with the previous member, one has to waste one’s time on this kind of nonsense.

I should like to deal with the more pleasant aspects of this Vote and with police matters themselves. We have a very nice report here, one which has been very well produced and printed on choice paper. There are good photographs in the report …

Is that all you understand of it?

I shall deal a little later with the hon. member who is so cattish. I want to refer in particular to the photographs which appear between pages 8 and 9 and which give us an idea of the members serving on the borders. I want to leave the hon. the Minister with the idea that more such photographs be published in South Africa and that the circumstances under which our police must serve on the borders should be publicized more effectively. In this connection we could perhaps also consider making greater use of films as a means of propaganda to publicise these circumstances. This report furnishes us with a great many particulars. I take it the hon. member for Turffontein has also read it. I want to refer to a few matters in particular which are mentioned in it.

In the first place I want to refer to recruitment and the fact that we now have policewomen. This is a fine step forward. Some of these policewomen have already achieved a great deal in extramural activities. Recently one of the women members of the police gained the high jump title at the South African champoinships. Another young lady took part in the South African target shooting championships in Bloemfontein as a member of the South African Police team.

We find another interesting aspect on page 3 of the report. There we find that out of a total recruitment of 1 951 members, less than 10% are English speaking. I think that it is necessary to appeal once more to the English-speaking section of our population, and, inter alia, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg District in particular. They must do more to encourage their people to join the police. Serious problems stem from this situation and it is really essential for more members of the English-speaking population to join the police so that there too, they may do their share. Many English-speaking members of the police have rendered very good service and attained the highest positions, and I think that serious consideration should be given to this, particularly by hon. members opposite, who could make an important contribution in this respect.

Another fine aspect I find in this report, and in respect of which we in this House attempted to inspire the police a few years ago, is academic training. It is gratifying to see that eight members of the Police Force attained their degrees during the past year.

We find a disturbing aspect on page 8 and subsequent pages, which deal with the participation of the police on our borders. Here one cannot but think with contempt of the hon. member for Houghton, who refers to our policemen as trigger-happy people. This really came as a shock to us in this House this afternoon. On previous occasions the hon. member used these words, and perhaps they applied there. If one considers what difficult work these people do, internally and on the borders, however, one cannot understand their being referred to as trigger-happy people. On page 8 of the report there is something which is disturbing. There we find that three European members of the Police Force— and to that we must add the four non-Whites who have been killed in the past few weeks—were murdered in cold blood on the border. We find further that 22 White members of the Force sustained injuries as a result of landmine explosions and other causes. When one converses with our people—and this applies particularly to our younger people—they nevertheless pose the question, “But does the danger exist?” I feel that during the discussion of his Vote we should by means of publications and also through the publication of the facts on the part of the police, attempt to bring this danger to the attention of our people. Our people are simply not aware that this war of a low intensity is in fact a very dangerous war, just like a conventional war. Therefore I am pleased about the photographs and the details furnished in this report. I just hope that it will contribute towards a realization on the part of our people that our police should be enjoying all the support we can give them. Therefore it is also gratifying to read in the latest edition of SARP, the monthly police magazine—which is a fine and well-published magazine—that a well-known senior advocate in London, a certain Mr. Stephen Stout-Kerr, said the following—

Sir, that is a very fine testimony from someone from abroad. There are many fine things mentioned in this report. This is an active, dynamic department and I would like to congratulate the hon. the Minister and his whole department on the enthusiasm with which their case is presented and with which it is presented here so that we can debate it in this House.

Sir, I did not want to rise so early in the debate, but because the hon. member for Houghton has made such an unjust attack, in my opinion, on the South African Police, as far as the use of weapons is concerned, I feel obliged to furnish the Committee with the facts. Sir, we hear a good deal from the hon. member for Houghton in this police debate every year on how the Bantu are treated by the South African Police, and I really thought that she would express great appreciation this afternoon for what we have done for the Bantu in Soweto, for the opening of a new police station there, and so forth. I also hoped that the hon. member would get up and address a warning to these young people who show an increasing tendency to commit serious crimes; that she would warn them that it could have very serious consequences for them. Instead of discussing these positive aspects of this Vote, the hon. member for Houghton again made a violent attack on the South African Police this afternoon.

She gave a few examples which she had wrested completely from their context; she gave an enormous number of figures in respect of wounded people; she mentioned the case of a few young people and she forgot to mention that in the case of the one youth she mentioned, that person allowed himself to be locked up in the shop after closing time. I may tell her that it was a great big strapping youth; he was not at all of such a tender age as she wanted to give out here; she wants to create the impression here to the overseas Press that we shoot on little children who are five, six and seven years old. It was a great big strapping youth who hid himself in that shop, and when he got to the police station, he ran away again. Sir, how are we to catch these people? How are we to combat crime? Accusations are flung at the police every day. The hon. member has just asked why so few of these cases come to court. We are asked to combat crime, and as soon as we combat crime, the hon. member for Houghton comes along with these silly little stories of hers. I think I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for Kroonstad. I wonder whether these cases which she mentioned here this afternoon are not being used here again for the benefit of this Mr. Levin who lives abroad. It seems to me that every time when the Police Vote is discussed, the hon. member looks for something that can be distorted again in the outside world. [Interjection.]

I shall tell the hon. member why this is so. The hon. member has never thought of the positive side. She has never thought of the circumstances in which the South African Police have to combat crime and see to it that her house remains safe. I do not have the least doubt that the day when the house of the hon. member for Houghton is burgled, a great hue and cry will be raised: “Where are the South African Police; why do they not shoot and kill these people?”

Sir, we have a duty in South Africa to protect people. Let me say this to the hon. member for Houghton this afternoon: I also have a duty to protect the South African Police. We cannot allow the South African Police to face some of the worst hooligans and criminals in South Africa without a weapon

That is not what I suggested.

The hon. member says that her words in this House bring relief to the problems she sees. I want to tell her quite frankly this afternoon, with reference to the remarks she made here, that I shall not allow the South African Police to go about without weapons.

Nobody asked for that.

I was kind enough to give the hon. member this enormous number of regulations. [Interjection.] If the hon. member would be quiet now she could make another speech at a later stage. Sir, I was kind enough, in an attempt to help the hon. member for Houghton, to give her the regulations that apply in regard to the use of arms, and if the hon. member had been at all fair to the South African Police, she would have mentioned how comprehensive these regulations are, and how careful the South African Police have to be in using a weapon.

I read it.

Sir, there are two pages of these regulations. The least we could have expected was that she would give a proper summary of the regulations. Sir, let me just give you the facts. In 1972 the police killed 94 people in the performance of their duties; three were Whites and 91 non-Whites. Sir, in only two cases criminal proceedings were instituted against the members of the South African Police by an attorney-general as a result of these deaths. The one member was a non-White. He was found not guilty, and the case against the other member, who is a White, is still pending. [Interjection.] I now want to appeal to the hon. member for Houghton to stop being prejudiced against the South African Police and to listen in all fairness to the reply I am giving her. Sir, in 84 cases judicial inquests have already been concluded and it has been found that it was justifiable homicide; that no blame attached to the police. Then there are eight inquests that have not yet been concluded. In 25 of the 94 cases, non-White members of the Force were obliged to use their weapons against members of their own race. Sir, in 1972 there was one single case of judicial proceedings against the South African Police, and this case is still pending. We do not know whether the man will be found guilty or not guilty. This then is the record in a Force consisting of more than 34 000 members. If the hon. member for Houghton had wanted to give us an exposition of the true position, she would have been able to state proudly this afternoon that the South African Police has a record second to none as far as the use of fire-arms is concerned.

Has the hon. member ever realized what it means to a South African policeman to go into a Bantu residential area when gangs of thugs are running riot with the intention of shooting and killing each other and shooting the South African Police? Has she seen criminals who are expert at knifing? Does she want the South African policeman not to draw his revolver?

No, I never suggested that.

Sir, the hon. member did suggest that.

I did not.

The hon. member complained that the South African Police were shooting too often and I am telling her that the South African Police do not shoot too often. Every time a South African policeman uses his revolver, the case is properly investigated, and here are the figures. There is only one case of culpable homicide still pending in the courts.

They are protected by the law.

Sir, I want to say this to the hon. member for Houghton: I should really prefer her to go and present Mr. Lewin with gossip without her trying to substantiate it here on the basis of our statistics. Let her please put our statistics in perspective if she wants to use them. Let her be fair towards our people; then I shall not take it amiss if she expresses legitimate criticism. Sir, I want to tell you that I myself, my Minister and the Commissioner of Police are the three persons who are the most deeply concerned about any unjust action being taken against the public by the South African Police, and we honestly do not need the distortions of the hon. member for Houghton to rouse us into activity. I want to appeal to the hon. member.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order …

Order! The hon. the Deputy Minister must withdraw the word “distortions”.

I withdraw it, and I substitute for it the word “neardistortions”.

On a point of order …

Order! The hon. the Minister must withdraw the word “near-distortions” as well. [Interjection.]

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Potchefstroom has repeated the word “distortion”.

Has the hon. member repeated that word?

I have and I withdraw it.

The hon. the Deputy Minister may proceed.

Sir, I have now given the figures and I want to appeal to the hon. member. I want to tell her that I appreciate sound, constructive criticism on the South African Police. We are not here to cover up things that should not be covered up. I am not here, and my Minister is not here, to try to pretend that we are dealing with a bunch of angels. We realize very well that people cannot go about with a Statute Book in one hand and a revolver in the other. We realize very well that when a policeman lands in a particular situation he has to know his regulations so well, to the best of his ability, that he automatically knows what to do. Instead of adopting a conciliatory attitude here and saying, in a spirit of forgiveness towards the S.A. Police, that she can understand that they sometimes go too far in certain circumstances, she criticizes. Then we would have listened to her criticism, but when the hon. member for Houghton comes along here all ardour in the criticism she expresses, with the statistics she tries to extract for some purpose I do not want to mention again, because I do not want to withdraw it again— you know what I mean … [Interjections.] I say that if she does that she must really not expect me to take her seriously.

Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to pursue the matter which the hon. the Minister has raised. We on this side of the House, the official Opposition, had an opportunity of raising this matter in a previous debate and we feel that a full discussion took place at that time. The hon. member for Durban North indicated that it was my intention to discuss the manpower situation, and I wish to do so in the light of the shortage, particularly of White warrant officers, sergeants and constables. In my analysis I want to make it quite clear straight away that these are official figures, given to me by the hon. the Minister as the result of questions asked, and that they deal with the period ending the 31st December. In contrast to this, the figures supplied in the report are figures which deal with the matter up to the 30th June. So in regard to this particular report, my figures are therefore six months ahead of the figures reflected in the report.

I believe that the manpower situation, as far as the White personnel in the S.A. Police Force is concerned, is deteriorating and that there is little likelihood of future improvement. I based my figures on the year 1966 and the year 1972 and I refer in the first instance to the authorized establishment in 1966, which is given as 15 253. The authorized establishment in 1972 is given as 16 273. This shows an increase of 1 020 in the personnel, but the actual increase over this period of seven years amounts to a mere 58 men. In other words, the actual increase shows an increase of less than 6% on the anticipated authorized increase.

But what has happened on the other side of the scale? The population of South Africa has increased during this time by an estimated 4,5 million people. Not only that, but there has been an increase in crime statistics which amount over those seven years to close on 650 000 crimes. This represents a 26% increase during the period 1966 to 1972.

I want at this stage to pay tribute to a Police Force, depleted in manpower, and to the men themselves who through their devoted service under difficult conditions have been able to maintain law and order and to give the public protection. But surely these figures are a warning light to the Deputy Minister. Surely he is concerned at the alarming wastage that is taking place, particularly among the White section of the S.A. Police. When we consider this wastage we find that again between these years, 1966 to 1972, 11 489 men left the Force. The reasons for their leaving were discharges, and dismissals, but in the main it was purchased discharge. I want to refer in passing to this question of “purchased discharge”, because the figures for the last three years, 1970, 1971 and 1972, show that 4 464 men purchased their discharge from the South African Police Force. In this three-year period this figure shows that 206 more members purchased their discharge, than the number of recruits who completed their training in the same period. This number does not include the discharges and dismissals under the other heading. If we include that figure of 883 and compare the number who left the Police Force with the number of recruits who completed their training over the period of three years, we find that the difference, the wastage reveals a shortfall of 1 089 men.

My information is that policemen with a service of approximately 10 years in the Force who have resigned from the Force, have collected their bulk pension allowance and have had to use this to liquidate the debts they have contracted because in many instances they have not been able to come out on the salaries which they have been paid. They have then re-enlisted as constables in the Force. Obviously we welcome the improvements which have been announced by the hon. the Minister this afternoon. We hope that this will be some means of assisting these men to keep their head above water in these days of inflation.

Another interesting fact is that during the last three years 10% of the total of Whites in the Force and in those three categories to which I have referred, have bought their discharge. When we come to look at the picture of the non-Whites, we find that the number who have purchased their discharge is just a fraction over 2%. It would therefore appear that the greatest dissatisfaction in so far as living conditions or pay are concerned, exists among the White members of the Force.

If one examines the latest report, one finds that the overall actual establishment of warrant officers, sergeants and constables as far as non-Whites are concerned, exceeds the number of Whites. One also finds that Bantu comprise 85% of the total non-White Force and taking it a stage further, we find that the Bantu comprise 40% of the total South African Police Force at the present moment.

We on this side of the House have no problem with or objection to the non-Whites in South Africa playing a meaningful part in the Police Force, but in terms of Nationalist Government policy these Bantu will become citizens of independent self-governing states. I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister what his future plans are to ensure that the Republic of South Africa has an adequate Police Force. The present position—I am referring to the Whites—is almost static and yet the Police Force is required, in addition to its normal duties, to provide anti-terrorist forces on the border in a situation which shows signs of escalation, to deal with an overall increase in crime, and to cope with a growing dagga and drug traffic.

I want now to refer to this question of dagga, because in some respects the problem is more severe in South Africa than it is in the United States. Recently I was told that three million kg of dagga was destroyed by the South African Police. The significant thing is that two million kg was destroyed in the Bantu homelands and one million kg in the White areas of South Africa. I want to ask the hon the Deputy Minister how he will cope with this problem when the South African Police helicopters will not have ready access to sovereign, independent Bantu states. How will the border patrols be manned which will be necessary to protect the Republic’s frontiers? I want to suggest that there is a possible solution to this, that sniffer or dagga dogs can play an important role in this increasing problem. I know that in 1970 the hon. the Minister indicated that experiments were taking place in regard to the training of dagga dogs to sniff out the presence of dagga. The current report before us indicates on page 3 that the dagga dog section now has two instructors and six handlers. We on this side of the House welcome this first step in this new development. But I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister to institute immediately a crash training course for dogs which can be trained to detect dagga and drugs. Sir, there is nothing unique about the idea. Many countries of the world are using this system with satisfactory results. We find that the system is in use in Israel, Norway, the United Arab Republic, the United Kingdom and the United States. Way back in May, 1972, the United States had 66 dogs which were trained and consigned to various ports of entry to deal with the question of drugs as a whole and not just dagga. The official records reveal that these dogs checked 4½ million vehicles, mail packages or cargo units. These official statistics also reveal that the contraband recovered, as a result of the use of these dogs, amounted to 4,6 million dollars. Among the contraband goods was an amount of eight tons of marijuana, or as we call it, dagga. We know our problems as far as dagga is concerned. I urge the Minister please to give important consideration to this matter. [Time expired.]

We are very grateful that the Opposition is also adopting this attitude in respect of the South African Police establishment. We are also grateful for the fact that they are concurring with us this afternoon as, in fact, I think they also did last year, with regard to the payment of policemen. For the past few years this side of the House has been advocating better remuneration for our South African policemen. In passing I just also want to mention something to the hon. member for Berea. He spoke of the provision being made for the training of Bantu policemen. I should like to refer the hon. member to the new training college at Hammanskraal. He would do well to go and visit this college one day. This college is going to make provision for the training of the Bantu policemen for the homelands. As far as the training of police dogs is concerned, I think the hon. the Deputy Minister will reply to the hon. member for Berea in a short while. He will be surprised to learn what progress has been made in the training of police dogs.

I should just like to dwell briefly on two matters. Firstly, I want to mention the use of fire-arms, which was also mentioned by the hon. member for Houghton and which was fully dealt with by the hon. the Deputy Minister. If one projects the 94 cases mentioned by the hon. member for Houghton against the more than three million cases investigated by the South African Police, they form merely a drop in the ocean. When one goes further and thinks of the one case that comes before the courts as against the more than three million cases handled by the police, one cannot but think with gratitude of our South African Police. I want to remind the hon. member further that in the police regulations, which she has a copy of, it is stated very clearly that the police must restrain themselves when they are using fire-arms. They are people with self-control. I am now thinking of the one example she mentioned, i.e. the case of a person by the name of Carstens who was shot dead in Hillbrow. The policeman who shot and killed him was a man of 45 years of age. He was not a 19-year-old constable. As the evidence also stated he was trembling after he had shot the man. The occurance had an effect on him. As he himself put it, it was the first person he had ever shot dead in his life. These are people with self-control, and they do not do this because they take pleasure in it. I also want to point out to the hon. member that when one looks at the number of cases handled by the police from 1962 to 1972, one finds that it has increased by one million. It surely goes without saying that the field that has to be covered has become much greater for the police. It goes without saying that the opportunities have increased for police action with fire-arms. The type of person one is dealing with also plays a tremendous role, and these are the factors the hon. member would do well to take into account. There are numerous other occasions where the police could have used fire-arms, but did not do so, which indicates the self-control of the police. Those are positive aspects which the hon. member, on her own volition, and according to her own way of thinking, simply leaves unconsidered. She perhaps does so with premeditation, but one would not know how she thinks about these matters.

The other matter I should like to broach in the time at my disposal is that of our Reserve Police Force. I am very greateful to have read in the report of the Commissioner that such good progress is being made in respect of our Reserve Police Force. This is a positive aspect in this report, as are many others too. One is particularly grateful for the number of active members, White as well as non-White, and also for the fact that the public is continually enlisting in the Reserve Police Force. It is absolutely essential for one to give very emphatic attention to this matter. Firstly I should very much like to ask whether the Deputy Minister, the Commissioner and the Force would consider giving more active and more intensive training to these Reservists. This has become absolutely essential in these times. I am thinking, in particular, of more intensive training as far as the use of arms is concerned. Perhaps there could also be joint, intensive training for these Reservists. One is aware of the fact that a group of Reservists at a specific police station may perhaps be insufficient, but then they could liaise with a neighbouring town and together undergo active training. I have very often asked myself: When danger perhaps approaches one day and the Reserve Police Force perhaps goes out on patrol together with other policemen, and they come upon a danger point, are shot at or have a hand grenade flung at them, would these people know what to do? Would they know whether they should scatter or bunch together? These are the matters in which the Reserve Police Force should receive training. I think it is also of great urgency for them to receive this training. There in Groblersdal we have a farm, Maleoskop, of more than 5 000 morgen, which belongs to the South African Police. On this farm they receive training before they go to the borders. Perhaps that is also suitable terrain for the training of Police Reservists. When one thinks of the passing-out parade for 100 policewoman last December at Loftus Versveld in Pretoria, and of the service they gave, one is grateful for having continually asked that we give attention to the women. I was at the passing-out parade that day and one was proud to see these women there on parade. According to inquiries I made, the policewomen are a very great asset in the Force. Therefore I want to ask that in a year or two from now we could also perhaps consider using women in the Reserve Police Force. These women could also do the administrative work in the police stations. One could also perhaps give them the necessary training as far as the use of fire-arms is concerned. We have many pistol clubs where they receive training in the handling of fire-arms, and perhaps one could consider doing this on a more intensive basis. It would actually be very pleasant if both husband and wife could be members of the Police Reserve Force.

Before I conclude I should like to refer to a symposium; it is a criminological symposium on criminal reform which is to be presented on 28th Augus by Unisa, the University of South Africa. It is going to be a three-day symposium. At this symposium many matters concerning criminal reform are going to be discussed. I think that if the hon. member for Houghton wants to become famous, she would do well to give a donation of a few thousand rand for the financing of this symposium. All aspects of the Police Force and of crime prevention are going to be discussed at this symposium. The establishment of a full-time criminological institute is also being envisaged under the auspices of Unisa. I think this is a praiseworthy effort. Every one of us in this House would do well to consider attending that symposium, or a part of it.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who resumed his seat a moment ago must please excuse me if I do not follow him up on what he said. From the very start I should like to thank the Commissioner, his officers and men. White and non-White, including the Security Service, very sincerely for the excellent service and protection in the prevention of crime they rendered over the past year for our country South Africa. We must also pause for a moment and think of those members of the Force who lost their lives in service during the past year. We also think of the families they left, and we sympathize with them.

When Gen. Joubert was promoted to Commissioner I warned him at the time that it was a hot seat he was going to occupy. Although at times it has become very hot indeed, he has always gained the victory in his own quiet way. We heard a moment ago that he will be going on pension at the end of the year. We wish him a happy retirement, and we thank him for his services.

†I welcome Gen. Crous who is taking over the seat. I know that he comes from South-West Africa, just as I do, and is known as a South-Wester. I am quite certain that he will enjoy his period of office as Commissioner.

On the debit side during the year, the Commissioner was faced with the unfortunate episode that a number of NCOs and men had to be arrested, tried and subsequently convicted by a criminal court for housebreaking and theft. However, he must be congratulated that he carried out his responsibilities with honour in ridding the Force of this group of undesirable men. It is a very large Force, recruited from all walks of life. Though every precaution is taken in selecting recruits, unsuitable elements only come to light when they are in the Force, but fortunately they form only a very small percentage. Policemen who are brought to court for trial and are sentenced, draw attention more than ordinary criminals. It is unreasonable that they should also receive a harsher punishment. I have no right to criticize the judiciary in the case but, taking into consideration the side factors of punishment that they have suffered, such as loss of employment, the disgrace factor, families that were left without income, the sentences were very harsh. The sentence of the leader was 10 years’ hard labour which I think was excessive for stealing components of a car when only a few days ago a criminal stealing whole motorcars was only given half that sentence. I sincerely hope that the trial papers will still come up for review. I am an ex-police officer and I am still proud of having been one and of having been a member of the S.A. Police. Therefore hon. members must forgive me if I am slightly biased towards the Force. One must see everything in the correct perspective, but on the credit side there is much to commend the Force as a whole. These men, White and non-White, fight terrorists on our borders with the possibility of being blown up by land-mines, shot, wounded, or even murdered. This they do out of loyalty to our country. How can we ever acknowledge our appreciation to those who have given up their lives in defending us. But for one matter we must collectively thank the Commissioner and that is that all the policemen killed, White and non-White, were buried with full military honours and that both he and the Deputy Minister fortunately found time to attend these funerals.

Then there were the Bantu strikes in Natal. An explosive position has been contained and this could only have been achieved on account of tact and forbearance on the part of the police. During the war, officers and men were decorated, promoted or commended or as they say in military circles, mentioned in despatches, in the field for valour, leadership, bravery, etc. I wonder if the public really appreciates what the police did to avoid bloodshed during these strikes. May I ask whether some of these officers and men did not earn some recognition. I know of at least one senior officer in Natal who excelled himself in this respect. I think of another case where about 200 Bantu with sticks came along the main street in a very built-up area, shouting and gesticulating with their sticks when a pick-up van rolled up with two youngsters in it. Fortunately the one spoke Zulu very well. I do not know what he said but I presume that he said in Zulu: “You must stop please. Where are you going to? Are you fighting or looking for money?” They said that they were looking for money in reply to which he said: “Surely you do not go and look for money with fighting sticks. Do you not think that you should put them down? This is the wrong road, you should take the road over there and you should go to those buildings which is the buildings where you should go and look for money.” Within ten minutes 200 fighting Bantu were disarmed. They took that road laughing and gesticulating, looking for money. Then there was another case, a similar case, where a pick-up van rolled up. He redirected them into a different direction and one old man said: “I cannot walk anymore; I have walked so far already and my feet are so sore.” The policeman said: “Why do you not get into the pick-up van because I am also going there. I will give you a lift.” Then there were two or three others who also had sore feet. That is what I call tact under very explosive circumstances.

Then there is the question of pay. Constables, and especially the juniors, are on a very low scale. Why can they not be paid at least as much as railway policemen? All I can say to the hon. the Minister is: “Play the game.” I feel certain that he agrees with me that they are underpaid. Their allowance of R30 per month is very welcome, but that still does not bring them up to the scale applicable to the South African Railway Police.

The police are still burdened with untold amounts of extraneous duties. I feel that some alternative must be found, so that somebody else can do this work and relieve the police for ordinary police duty. The increase of crime is a world phenonenon which has raised its head in South Africa as well, and the shortage of policemen aggravates the position.

Sir, we must congratulate our policewomen too. I believe that they have proved to be a very successful acquisition to the South African Police Force. They are replacing males in various indoor duties, both clerical and technical. For example, they man radio stations. They are also doing excellent work in the prevention of crime amongst juveniles.

Then, Sir, there are the police reservists who have become a very important part of the Force, especially the Whites, who now number five-sixths of the permanent force. Should they not now be considered for some sort of remuneration? I would especially like to commend reservist Lieutenant Rennie and his wife, Constable Rennie, and the three other members who did such yeoman service rescuing people during the floods in the Eastern Cape. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg City must excuse me if I do not follow up on what he said. This afternoon I should like to say a few words about the whole question of the manning of police stations by non-Whites. For some considerable time there have, from within our ranks in South Africa, been various representations for police stations in non-White areas—those in the homelands as well as those in the non-White residential areas within White South Africa—to be manned by the non-Whites themselves. If we look at the present position, we find that as far as the full control of police stations by non-Whites is concerned, there is one police station that is fully manned and controlled by Indians, seven by Coloureds and 37 by Bantu. There are 32 police stations with a full non-White complement, except for a single White person in a supervisory capacity or in charge of the station—this is particularly the case in the non-White township areas. In the Transkei we have already transferred five police stations to the Transkeian Government. If we look at those who have executive posts at these stations, we find in the case of the Indians, for example, that there are two station commanders and six branch commanders. A branch, we all know, is a sub-division of a police station. At any police station there is, for example, the commercial branch, the detective branch, etc. That is what is meant by “branch”. In the case of the Coloureds there are ten station commanders and two branch commanders. In the case of the Bantu there are 53 station commanders and 24 branch commanders in addition to another 27 prosecutors whom we already have. Sir, we know that the non-Whites can progress to the rank of lieutenant. This is the highest rank that can be achieved by the non-Whites at this stage. We know that the non-White policemen, of whom there are 15 000 in the South African Police, are keen and eager to obtain better qualifications for themselves, but here I want to state the very important point in this connection: With the requests that more and more functions of the South African Police, whether in the Bantu homelands or in the Bantu residential areas in White South Africa, should be transferred to non-Whites, we must be very careful how we act in this connection. I do not thereby want to allege that those people do not have the potential to be able to handle the work, but I want to allege that we are dealing here with a situation involving law and order in South Africa, and even if it were a matter of law and order in the Bantu homeland, it is still a matter of law and order, and those people who have to exercise authority, where law and order must be enforced, must be sufficiently mature for this work. They must not only be mature for this work; they must be trained for it. Not only must they be trained for this work, but the correct attitude towards this work must also be cultivated. If we consider that this type of work must be transferred to the non-Whites themselves, we must think in terms of divisional commissioners—and there are 16 divisional commissioners in White South Africa—and we must consider the fact that people who have reached these executive positions are not only people who are highly qualified, but also people with many years of experience. It seldom happens that people in the South African Police attain these positions before they have 25 to 30 years service behind them. In other words, Sir, over and above academic ability, wisdom and insight have grown in the course of time, enabling those people to act with discretion. The police today have a very important task. We shall have to teach these non-Whites that when they have to take action against their own fellow citizens, they must display the correct attitude. In this connection I should like to sound a warning today. Although we must give attention to the transference of police functions to the various Bantu peoples, not only in the homelands but also in the Bantu residential areas within White South Africa, I want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister that we be very careful; that we should regard this matter in a serious light and that we should place first the preservation of law and order, which is primarily the function of the South African Police.

Sir, then I just briefly want to refer to another matter. We heard here today that Gen. Joubert is retiring at the end of November. As one Western Transvaler to another … [Interjections.] Yes, that is a good part of the world; hon. members can see what the Western Transvaal produces. Gen. Joubert and I were born about 11 miles from each other, but many years separate our ages. On our part, and particularly as a person from the Western Transvaal, I also want to tell Gen. Joubert that we Western Transvalers are proud of the people that the Western Transvaal has produced, even though the United Party men say that the Western Transvaal is the “bundu”. After all, the hon. member for Durban Point speaks of the Western Transvaal as the “bundu”. But the “bundu” has already done many good things in South Africa. Even the Rebellion started up in the “bundu” and that was a good thing. I should like to tell Gen. Joubert that we greatly appreciate the work he has done, and in expressing our great appreciation to him we are doing so to the entire Police Force. We want to tell Gen. Crous that we are sure that things will also go well with him in our ranks. Sir, having now said this to the present Commissioner and his successor, there is something that is very dear to my heart, and that is that we should look after our policemen. Even though we cannot give them the same salary that we give to the Railway Police, I think there are other benefits we can give these people. I think that something should, in particular, be done for the South African policemen as far as their housing problems are concerned. You know, Sir, for a young person housing is probably one of the most serious problems. If we could now offer the South African Police something as far as housing is concerned, if we could do something along those lines, I think we would be doing a very great service to our young people who want to enter the service of the South African Police.

It was very pleasing to hear the hon. member for Christiana devoting so much time and attention to the situation surrounding our non-White policemen. It is quite clear that the hon. member for Christiana has given a fair amount of thought to the proper training of non-White policemen and I think he spoke from the heart when he pleaded, in effect, for a better deal for them in many respects. We all heard his advice to the Minister and I am quite sure the Minister will give heed to it, that the sort of people we get into the South African Police Force, Whites as well as non-Whites, must be the right sort of people with the right attitude towards their work. I am glad that he raised that matter because during this session we have given a considerable amount of attention to this whole question of non-White recruitment, and that hon. member and the Deputy Minister will no doubt remember that we have put a series of questions to the Government about the general treatment of our non-White policemen. Now, seeing that the hon. member for Christiana has posed the question of how we can ensure that we get the right sort of people into the Police Force, I think I might well pose the hon. the Deputy Minister the question of how he proposes to do it. You see, Sir, during March of this year I asked the Minister of Police some questions about the training of Coloured policemen here in the Western Cape. As we know, we have a police training college for Coloured recruits here, a college which has cost the Government something like R380 000 to build and has quite a considerable establishment. I asked him what sort of intake we had into this Coloured training college for Coloured police over the last few years and these were the figures he gave me: In 1969 the intake was 216; in 1970 it dropped to 167; in 1971 it was 197; and in 1972, for the entire year, it was 50. I asked the Minister, as a supplementary question, what the explanation was for this very sharp drop in the intake into the Coloured training college. His only reply to me was “because we have not been able to get the necessary recruits”. Now, Sir, what an admission of failure! Let us not pretend that Coloured policemen are not needed, especially in the Western Cape. We all know of the high incidence of crime both in our urban areas and in the non-White townships. The hon. the Deputy Minister is as well aware of this as anyone else. We know that places such as Bishop Lavis and Manenberg did not have police stations for thousands of inhabitants. It was interesting to hear the hon. member for Durban North referring to the fact that we are seeing rather more policemen on the beat in places like the Avenue here. This we welcome, but I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister how many policemen are seen on the beat in the Coloured areas around Cape Town and what protection do the normal, respectable, law-abiding Coloured people receive from the Police Force? Is he endeavouring to ensure that sufficient policemen and sufficient policemen of the right calibre are drawn into the Police Force? If one looks at the whole question of the establishment of the Police Force, one sees that last year, for instance, 39 Coloured policemen joined the South African Police Force and 113 left it. This was a loss of something like 5½% in the establishment which last year was 1 341 Coloured policemen. I think we are entitled to learn from the hon. the Deputy Minister exactly what the reason for this is. It is not sufficient for him to say, as the Minister said, that they have just not been able to get the necessary recruits. There is something very seriously wrong if we are not able to get recruits for this type of activity.

I want to suggest to the hon. the Deputy Minister that there might be some very good reasons. One of the reasons might well be that our non-White policemen are not accorded fair treatment as compared with the White policemen and, heaven knows, we are far from satisfying the needs of our White members of the Police Force. Let us just look at the question of things like uniforms. I think the hon. the Deputy Minister will agree with me that basic commodities like clothing are no cheaper for non-Whites than they are for Whites. It is very difficult to draw direct comparisons, although I shall try to do so in a moment between Whites and non-Whites as far as uniform allowances go in respect of some ranks. However, let us just look at what happens to a policeman when he achieves commissioned rank. On his first appointment to commissioned rank a White member of the Police Force is paid R237 to defray expenses for additional uniform equipment. Where the White policeman receives R237, what does a non-White policeman receive? It is R106, which is less than half the amount which his White colleague receives. What is the reason for this? Are we suggesting that the non-White commissioned officers of our Police Force should be treated in some inferior way? I think the hon. the Deputy Minister must tell us what the reason is. It can only be one of three reasons as far as I can make out. The first one could be that the uniforms of non-White police officers are inferior to those of their White colleagues.

Nonsense!

That hon. member says “nonsense”, but why is the allowance for a non-White police officer less than half of that of a White police officer?

Why do you earn less than Harry Oppenheimer? [Interjections.]

It could be that the uniforms are of inferior quality. Otherwise, secondly, it could be that the Government believes that non-White policemen need less to wear than White policemen.

That is also nonsense.

Well, I am waiting for the answer. Thirdly, it could be that non-White policemen are simply expected to pay more towards the cost of their uniforms than their White colleagues. Which one of these is it? Are they expected to pay more, or are they simply regarded as being generally inferior and that they do not need so much by way of uniform, or that their uniforms must be of inferior quality? [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to associate myself with previous speakers on both sides of the House who have pleaded for better conditions of employment for the South African Police. I think that we shall only have a thorough understanding of the tremendous task resting on the shoulders of the police if we remember that the total strength of the S.A. Police Force is less than that of a large city such as New York, a city with a population of about one-third of that of the Republic of South Africa. Only when we have made this comparison do we realize in what remarkable and outstanding manner our police have performed their task in the past years. The days when the most important duty of a constable was to mount his horse and investigate a stock theft, are long past. We are living in a time in which crime is not only on the increase, but is also becoming planned and executed with sophistication. Today a policeman must be trained in many professional skills. He must have a good knowledge of and training in modern methods of undermining and sabotage. Yes, Sir, it is virtually impossible in this technological age to think of a sphere of life in which the policeman does not constantly have to equip himself in order to be able to execute properly his task of combating crime and maintaining peace and security.

There is the danger that the tremendous increase in crime which has occurred overseas may also have a contagious effect here. It is comforting to know that our Police force are aware of this and that apparently they are already preparing to combat a sudden increase in this country. In order to indicate how serious the position is overseas, I just want to mention a few statistics. In New York, for example, there were 1691 murders, 3 271 rapes and 37 130 serious assaults in 1972. That was in one city in America alone. In Frankfurt in West Germany the crime rate is rising rapidly. In West Berlin, a city with two million inhabitants, there has been an increase of 43% in the crime rate in respect of serious crimes in the past five years. In fact, one out of every 16 West Berliners can expect to be robbed in the coming year. In Rome a robbery takes place every 3½ minutes. That is the position. The unfortunate additional factor is that crime is to an ever-increasing extent being committed by young people, and what is worse, these are crimes of physical assault. In view of this our police are facing a problem. If a rapid increase in crime were to take place in South Africa, our Police Force would have to be strengthened within a short time. I realize that the hon. the Deputy Minister and the Minister have serious problems in this connection. They have to make the best use of the available pool of manpower. For my part I want to suggest that a more urgent appeal be made to our English-speaking fellow citizens to join the Police Force. Only 10% of our recruits at present come from the ranks of our English-speaking fellow citizens. This is really a positive task for the English-language Press of South Africa, and I say this without wishing to give offence and without wishing to be facetious; here is a task which they could propagate with far greater benefit to South Africa than certain other matters which they are propagating. In other words, they should constantly encourage our English-speaking fellow citizens to send their young men to the Police Force. They will be welcome and will strengthen the ranks of our Police Force, and in this way will also make our Police Force more representative of the White population of South Africa.

In conclusion I want to associate myself with the hon. member for Christiana, and request that, as far as the housing of police is concerned, consideration should once more be given to whether, if only as far as the Police are concerned, an exception cannot be made for Police officers who have to rent houses or flats. In the Public Service there is a system of subsidization of the payments made by officials who have bought houses. The circumstances of officials in Government Departments are not the same, in the sense that all officials are not transferred to the same extent as the police. The police often have to accept service throughout the length and breadth of our country at short notice, service in the interests of us all. I therefore want to make a very serious request for it to considered, where they have to rent flats, or houses, whether there could not be a subsidy for them as well under those instances. A system could be worked out to suit them. The security of our country is our most precious possession and we often accept it too easily. We should be prepared to pay for this. I realize that we can never reward our policemen properly and as they should be rewarded. We are grateful for the increase in salaries which has now been announced, but we still want to ask for further improvements and we ask this of the Minister not because we think that he is unaware of the desirableness of further increases, but to strengthen his hand and support his case. I thus want to make another plea for further improvements in the conditions of service of our police.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Wonderboom is the second hon. member on that side of the House who has made a plea for English-speaking people to join the Force. In a private member’s motion we discussed a month or two ago, just about every speaker on the Government side who took part, including the hon. the Deputy Minister himself, also passed remarks on this matter. The hon. the Deputy Minister said, amongst other things, that the English-speaking South African looks to business and that he wants his children to become wealthy. I think the suggestion in the speech of hon. the Deputy Minister then, and perhaps in the speeches of some hon. members today and before, is that the English-speaking South African is being unreasonable in not coming forward to join the Police Force. I think there is no basis for this whatsoever. I think it is certainly the suggestion which is implicit in these repeated statements we are getting. I think there is certainly a seriously implied criticism that duty is not being done. I think one should look at this a little more closely. It is true that the current report shows that approximately 12% of the male people accepted into the Force this year were English speaking. I personally believe that that would be at least as high as the proportion that has gone into the Public Service as a whole. I do not in fact know the precise figure, and I do not know if there is a breakdown of the figures language-wise. I would say, however, that the figure is at least as high as the number which has gone into the Public Service. I believe that if we truly want to get to the bottom of this, if we truly want to have a larger proportion, then one must go a bit deeper than the mere surface. I personally believe there are many reasons, perhaps too many to deal with here—historical and other reasons —but there are certain reasons that this Government can put right. I firmly believe, rightly or wrongly, that the English speaking person going into either the Police Force or the Public Service does not believe that he will get a square deal. I say that, rightly or wrongly …

Wrongly.

Hon. members may say that, but that is a superficial answer.

You have no proof of that.

I could cite the experience of hon. members on this side of the House as proof of it. I can give many personal cases which have been brought to my notice. Rightly or wrongly, that is what they believe. I would have thought that, rather than continually making these pleas, the Government should examine why this is so and see whether they cannot remove the causes for what is a very definite belief.

Why?

I explained why. It is because they feel they will not get a square a deal as a Nationalist will. The English-speaking person is not …

You are talking nonsense!

I want to make it plain: The English-speaking person who is not a Nationalist, thinks he will not get as square a deal as the Nationalist will get. [Interjections.] The hon. members can shout as much as they like, but I am quite convinced that that is so; I have a lot of knowledge from personal experience of people who have reported this to me.

Name them!

There is no need to name them or to get so excited. I suggest it would be better if the hon. the Deputy Minister looked into these matters. I am perfectly aware that certain people, those who do not get on in the Force or in the Service and who do not deserve to get on, are sometimes apt to attribute it to this fact; but, equally, there are many cases known to me, where on ability, the person should have gone further than he did.

I would like to join issue, also, with the hon. member for Wonderboom who rather tended to suggest that the crime rate in the world was high and that, as I understood him, to an extent this had blown across the ocean to us here.

No, I did not say that. I said there was a danger of the sharp increase spreading to us.

A danger? Therefore the hon. member thinks it has not come yet. Let me tell him that our crime statistics show that our crime rate is far in excess of anything in any Western country. I hasten to add that I would expect it to be greater because of our mixed population. However, let none of us think that we do not have a man-sized problem on our hands. We had a debate about this not so long ago and there is no need for me to quote the figures again. I only want to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister whether he thinks we are getting on top of this problem, because frankly, I do not. I want to say that I believe that not only is crime increasing, but the criminal is becoming more brazen. Only last night, one of my committee members, an oldish lady, told me of an attack upon her in the streets of Cape Town when her purse was taken. A few weeks ago another person with whom I was doing business, an oldish man, was waiting for the lift in a big building in Cape Town, when a gang of people came in, knocked him over and took his purse. This sort of thing, which as we know also happened to the hon. member for South Coast, admittedly some time ago, is very much on the increase. What worries me is that so many of our men are doing vital service on our borders that our Force is getting depleted. I would like to see far more policemen on the beat, in uniforms and in plain clothes, among the crowds of people in the streets of our main cities, so that they could intercept some of these criminals and help catch them. The hon. the Deputy Minister, in his speech in a private member’s motion, referred to the fact that people must regard the police as their friends. I quite agree: The police are our friends—they are a grand body of people —but I believe that the hon. the Minister must do more to let the public understand that they are our friends. He also said that the people must co-operate more, that the people, when trouble is afoot, give way— “gee pad” are the words he used—and he also said that, when it comes to arresting a person, they do not help nor are they keen to come to court. This is all true. My plea to the hon. the Minister is to do something to remedy this position. I do not believe that enough is being done. I believe that he must take special steps in an endeavour to bring about a greater degree of co-operation. I think he should consider awarding compensation to persons who get injured when they are helping the police in the execution of their duties. If it is possible he should consider making ex gratia payments and put it on a more permanent basis. I think he should embark upon an active campaign to get this across to the people and to seek their support. He should embark upon an active campaign to get this across, to get it into people’s minds. We must get on top of the crime and the criminals must not get on top of us. One realizes that the police are doing all they can but I believe that special and extraordinary steps are needed to bolster up people in this regard. The position has gone too far.

I am turning now to the question of the courts. Not enough consideration is given to witnesses. Many of our Magistrate Court witnesses are held up by other cases. They are told to report at 9 o’clock for instance to give evidence, but when they get there they are told to return at 11 o’clock or sit around and wait. There should be a much greater effort on the part of prosecutors in co-operation with the police to consider witnesses and to seek their co-operation. When they are prepared to give evidence, not enough is being done in this regard. As I say, it needs a big campaign to achieve this.

In conclusion I would like to say something in regard to Police raids. We heard of one the other day that was carried out in Athlone. In the private member’s motion there was a discussion on the raid which took place on the 16th January, 1973 when approximately 281 arrests were made. The hon. the Deputy Minister said then that it was too early to say how many convictions would follow, and I want him to tell us now how many charges and how many convictions have flowed from those arrests. I have a feeling that these raids have a value for a propaganda effort, but they do not really tackle the real gangster. That man is not tracked down specifically. You might as well say that he is being shot at with buckshot. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I found the hon. member for Pinelands a little disappointing in the sense that he insinuated here and said, by implication, that the National Government would perhaps discriminate against English-speaking people. I just want to tell the hon. member that there is an old Afrikaans proverb which states that one judges others by oneself. Hon. members will recall how, in the days of the old South African Party Government, there was discrimination against Afrikaans-speaking people. And with this I leave the hon. member at that.

If there is a branch of the population that can rightly say: “At thy call we shall not falter, firm and steadfast we shall stand,” it is certainly the South African Police and their families. What is the position exactly? In a nutshell I must tell hon. members today that the failures of parents, teachers and ministers become the problems and the responsibilities of the police. I am grateful to see that there is an increase of R6 646 000 in this year’s allocation to police services. In addition I should like to link up with the previous speakers who referred to Gen. Joubert the Commissioner of the South African Police. As a person who comes from Lichtenburg and who was also born in that part of the world, I should very much like to endorse their view.

There are two matters I should like to mention in connection with the neatness of policemen; I am referring here to policemen’s apparel. This afternoon I want to lodge a plea with the hon. the Minister to consider, or have an investigation carried out about the possibility of doing away with the old “Sam Browne” which policemen have to wear and to which the holster with its pistol are attached. In the first place it is very sloppy, and if there is anything that gets on my nerves it is someone constantly having to tug at his clothes to get them neat. One frequently notices that when these men get out of their vehicles they first have to adjust their clothes, because the clothes shift up under this “Sam Browne” to which their revolvers are attached. It is therefore sloppy, and I do not think it is very practical either. The second reason why I think the “Sam Browne” should be done away with, is that it is dangerous. It affords aggressive people, such as those whom the hon. member for Houghton sticks up for, more of an opportunity to get a grip on this “Sam Browne” when the policemen are carrying out their duties. I think that in all probability there ought to be a better and more sophisticated method for a policeman to carry his revolver. A very practical way would be, for example, to carry the revolver somewhere on his belt. I am very certain that if practical ways of implementing this were to be found they would, in fact, be implemented.

There is another matter I want to raise in connection with the neatness of uniforms. Here I want to refer to the dog-attendants, who do exceptionally good work. As far as I am concerned it is actually impractical to think that a dog-attendant should wear an ordinary, neat uniform when he is handling a dog. These dogs, for example, are transported in flying-squad vehicles to the Cape flats which are densely overgrown, and to the sugar plantations in the vicinity of Durban. In those densely overgrown areas the dogs are then used. These people who handle the dogs are constantly covered with hairs. The dogs’ mouths foams and the attendants are dealing with these dogs all the time. I therefor want to propose that the hon. the Minister should also investigate this matter so that these dog-attendants could perhaps be given the opportunity to wear a more comfortable and better uniform. Such a uniform is the person’s own property, and he himself is responsible for it. He must keep it clean himself.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hercules spoke about discrimination against the Afrikaner by the United Party when it was in power, and so on. Well, Sir, I leave it at that. One gets sick and tired of these arguments the whole time.

Tell Ossie he is wrong.

Sir, they are wrong. I served in the Police in those days and they know nothing about it. The hon. member went on to refer to the neatness of police. We all want to see a neat Police Force. I can assure the House, Sir, that no one is more concerned about the neatness of the police than the officers of the S.A. Police themselves. They are always putting up suggestions to the Commissioner, the Quartermaster and to the Minister eventually about improvements that should be brought about. It is not a thing that is lying dead and dormant; it is something that receives the attention of the officers the whole time, throughout the year. I want to point out to the hon. member that a “Sam Browne” is worn by officers and a combination belt by the other ranks, so do not let us confuse the two. The other ranks in the police will continue to wear the combination belt until a satisfactory substitute can be found.

Sir, everybody has welcomed Gen. Theo Crous in his new post, and I should like to associate myself with the words of welcome expressed here, but I must also express my disappointment here, Mr. Chairman. Last year I pleaded that whenever an officer was appointed as Commissioner he should be appointed for a set period. Gen. Crous will be turning 60 next year, which is the normal retiring age, but I take it that if the Government is going to follow the precedent in the case of Gen. Gous and Gen. Joubert, they will retain Gen. Crous’s services for another year, until he turns 21. [Laughter.] I beg your pardon, I mean 61! I am sure he wishes that he was 21 again! Sir, let us be practical about this. The incoming Commissioner is going to be Commissioner for the next 2½ years, that is to say, if his services are retained for an extra year or so. What can a Commissioner achieve in two years? I will admit that Gen. Crous has been second in charge for some considerable time, but he has also got his own ideas. He has been tied to a desk in Pretoria to a very large extent; he has not been able to move around. When he becomes Commissioner, virtually six months of his time will be spent in Cape Town and the other six in Pretoria. In addition he must also have some vacation leave. When is he going to find the time to look around and to make a personal appraisal of the situation on the ground.

He will stay on the ground for a time; do not worry.

The hon. member is talking rot. He has a lot of duties; he does not sit at his desk with his hands in his pockets like all the Nationalist members here. If it was not for the fact that the department gave them hand-outs they would not have anything to say. The Commissioner has a heavy duty on his hands, and you cannot within the space of two years formulate a policy and bring it to fruition. Sir, I would urge the hon. Deputy Minister to give this serious thought, because it is not fair on the incumbent of the office, nor is it fair to the Force or the Minister and, above all, it is not fair to the people of South Africa.

Sir, yesterday, when I criticized the dry-as-dust figures that we found in the annual report of the Department of Justice, what did I get from that side of the House? I was asked whether I could not read figures. But they too, the hon. member of Potchefstroom for one, used almost the very words that I used in praising the report of the Commissioner of Police, a report containing photographs and something that you can read and get your teeth into and not just figures. [Interjections.] Sir, I have been in Government service long enough to know what you can do with figures. You can hide a lot with figures. Here the Commissioner states his case openly, without shame, so that we can know the exact position of the Force and we are proud of the Force. And I also want to tell the hon. member for Houghton the Police Force are not a bunch of Kaffir-kickers. In your work, when you are dealing with criminals they will also use force against you. [Interjection.] The hon. member for Berea gave the House some very interesting figures to show how in the last few years the Police Force is, I will not say declining, but is certainly as far as the Whites’ establishment is concerned, not keeping up with the rate of progress in the rest of South Africa, and this is a very serious position. We look to the Minister to go into this thoroughly and to give the House a satisfactory reply as to what he intends doing about it.

Now, apart from being District Commandant of Welkom, I was also District Commandant of Zululand and I was very distressed to hear the other day when a friend told me about what happened at Eshowe not so long ago. Eshowe, after all, is the district headquarters for Zululand. This was on a Saturday-afternoon. A fight broke out at a compound on a farm which is only about six or seven miles outside Eshowe. They telephoned the charge office and there was a Bantu constable on duty who told the lady who phoned that there were no White policemen available tunately the farm foreman was available but he would see what he could do. Fortunately the farm foreman was available and with the aid of the indunas they were able to quell the fight. People got hurt and it was only after the fight was over that a few White policemen arrived on the scene. Now, having been stationed in those parts of the world and having suffered under the severity of the shortage of manpower, I sympathized with what happened and I promised them that I would bring this up, as an indication of what happens on the platteland. If the Commissioner were like the other departments, he would have given us various sets of figures but the point is this. You have your establishment and you have your actual strength and from that actual strength must be deducted the men on border duty, the men attending courses, the men who are on vacational leave and the men who are on sick leave, etc., and you find that in the end result your Force is down to nothing. This iniquitous shortage of men I put down to the five-day week. I know that the five-day week has come to stay. I make this suggestion to the hon. the Minister, that if men were asked to come to work extra during that five-day period and they were paid for it we would at least have people on duty. Thank God for the police reservists who fill our police stations particularly in the urban areas. If it were not for them, quite a number of police stations would have to close down over the weekends. Ask any police officer that and he will tell you that that is so. It is the police reservists who carry the police stations. In order to help the Force in this struggle against the eternal shortage of staff I suggest that a plan be made, that policemen who come in to work over and above their five days should be paid extra so that they can be encouraged to do so. In other words, they should be paid overtime. [Time expired.]

Several hon. members have already referred to the exceptionally low salary scales which obtain as far as the members of the Police Force are concerned. We are therefore exceptionally glad, too, for those allowances which the members of the Force are now going to receive. In thinking about this aspect of the conditions of service of the Force, this particularly low salary structure, I ask myself why this Force nevertheless always remains at full strength; what is there which thus inspires the members of the Police Force to carry on with this work, which frequently meets with so much ingratitude? What is that invisible force at work in the heart and spirit of these people? Having to seek an answer to that, I become convinced that there is only one facet to which that can be ascribed, and that is their love for their fatherland.

I see the personification and the calibre of those people in the person of the retiring Commissioner of Police. It is a fact that many of my hon. colleagues would like to associate themselves with the birthplace of our retiring Commissioner, i.e. the Western Transvaal.

Yes, of course!

I do not blame them. In the Western Transvaal one does sometimes reap what one has sown.

Unlike Somerset East.

In speaking about these members of the Police Force, I want to link up with what the hon. member for Kroonstad said earlier this afternoon when he referred to that member of the Police Force on the Gamtoos River. During the 1971 flood one police sergeant, Sgt. Fouché, saved 104 Brown people from drowning. It hurts me and it hurts us all on this side of the House, and I am sure it also hurts everyone on that side of the House to think that while there are people in this Force who take their lives in their hands to save even Brown people, the hon. member for Houghton comes along with the utmost ingratitude to these people whom she reviles here and outside the House in season and out of season. Those are the things that grieve one and rob one of one’s humanity, because one rebels when people take their lives in their hands and carry out rescue work where they can, to subsequently receive so much ingratitude. It is my experience that only the lawless have no appreciation for the members of the police. I want to state clearly that we on this side of the House have only the utmost appreciation for the members of the Police Force who, frequently under the greatest measure of provocation, have continued to maintain law and order, not only in this country, but also on the borders of our fatherland.

I think it was the hon. member for Pinelands and the hon. member for Durban North who referred to the strikes in Durban. I also want to take the hon. members’ thoughts back to the student riots last year when our policemen had to handle those students under the utmost provocation, with the eyes of the world focused on our policemen. Our policemen received only the utmost credit for the way in which they controlled the lawless according to the dictates of the law.

I want to say thank you very much to the hon. the Minister and the members of the department who have established new housing at various points in the Somerset East constituency. When all is said and done, it is frequently the policemen’s families who have to bear the worst brunt, those wives and children who frequently do not know where the heads of those households are, because they can be separated from their families for months as a result of duty on the border. I have the utmost appreciation for the hon. the Minister, the hon. the Deputy Minister and the members of the department who also look after the families of the policemen. I should like to link up with the hon. member for Wonderboom who advocated a subsidy for house rent which members of the Force frequently have to pay where no official residential quarters are available for members of the Force. They are people who are frequently transferred to other points at short notice.

I should like to associate myself with the appreciation expressed to the retiring Commissioner, and I want to wish him everything of the best. May he still have many opportunities to make his biltong there in the bushveld, as he used to; and may the new Commissioner also continue to have the exceptional loyalty of the members of the Police Force during his period of duty as Commissioner. Our best wishes also go with him.

Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Somerset East will excuse me if I do not follow up on what he said in his speech. I just want to tell him that the sentiments he expressed in appreciation of the police and their services are shared by this side of the House.

I should like to confine myself to an area where the Police are experiencing great problems. Please excuse me, Sir, if I just first explain to the Deputy Minister why they have greater problems in that area than in other parts. I just want to devote a few minutes to that. The situation with respect to the border—I am speaking now of the Eastern Cape, the area there near East London—is that Bantu cities are being built inside the Bantu areas, for example in the Ciskei, where the large urban area of Mdantsane is situated, as are Zada and others. The population consists chiefly of Bantu that have been moved from the Western Cape, from the areas that are regarded as Coloured areas, for example Middelburg, Burgersdorp, etc., and Duncan Village at East London. They form one great conglomeration in conjunction with those who go there from their own areas in the Ciskei because they think there are job opportunities. Notwithstanding the control exercised by the Department of Bantu Administration and Development, it is nevertheless impossible to inspect thousands of houses every day to see who are there. Consequently there is a large unemployed population. Inevitably crime amongst unemployed people, who do not earn their bread and butter, is much greater than in other areas.

I do not want to dwell at any length on the question of stock theft and other problems experienced by the farmers in the immediate vicinity. There are so many instances that the farmers have got to the stage—the Deputy Minister knows about that—that they no longer report stock thefts. They report very few of them, because there are so many other cases at the same time. Policemen are so widely scattered that it can easily take 48 to 72 hours to get hold of police dogs because the dogs are so busy with other cases that one cannot do anything about that, and from sheer despondency the farmers no longer report thefts.

As far as the pineapple industry is concerned, and this is one of the most concentrated of pineapples areas, the position is the same. It would, after all, do no good for a person to report the disappearance overnight of a whole area of pineapples on his farm. The pineapples have simply disappeared. The farmers no longer take any notice of that, either seldom reporting the occurrence.

I want to continue. The situation is much worse than it apears, particularly with respect to the crime committed within the urban areas themselves. When I speak of urban areas I do not mean only the Bantu areas. I include the city of East London and similar cities and towns. Recently there have been so many complaints of crime, assault and rape that it just is not true. It is mostly aged people who are involved. They are afraid to venture out into the streets during the day. In the immediate vicinity of East London there is dense bush, which cannot, after all, be completely eradicated, and this forms a hiding place for criminals of all kinds. Sir, I have here dozens of letters, mostly from aged people who are complaining about that. One usually refers them to the municipality or to the Commissioner of Police. Here, for example, I have a letter from Brig. Prinsloo who is the police chief there, in which he replies to representations I made to him. He states:

Unlike the hon. member for Houghton, I do not want to go into the merits of shooting people, but the plea I want to lodge with the hon. the Minister is that this matter should be investigated. If there has ever been an area where research is necessary, to see what can be done to help the position along, it is this area. I readily want to acknowledge that to begin with there is insufficient staff. This applies to posts within the cities as well as outposts. I know them and can list them one by one. There are simply too few police for the work. In spite of it all, this is an area where crime is concentrated as a result of the fact that there are so many unemployed. It does not help any, but if a person is hungry and is not able to feed and clothe himself, there is an increased tendency to commit crime; there must be more crime than in other: sports where people earn enough. It is also because of the composition of the population there, and it is not the Minister’s fault that the composition of the population is what it is, because this just happens to be Government policy. One of the factors is the composition of the Bantu population there in the Bantu areas and just outside the Bantu areas, and the Bantu’s ability to enter the city whenever they want to. On the other hand, the Whites are not allowed to enter their areas to go and look for anything. I myself know of a case of stock theft. Even though a farmer may do his best, when cattle are slaughtered, to catch those people, he may not enter that Bantu area. He must obtain a permit from the Department of Bantu Administration in order to do so. I am not saying this because I think he is able to do so, but I want to lodge a special plea with the Minister to see what can be done in this area. We are in utmost sympathy with the police, who are doing their best to combat crime. The aged come along to us, however, and say that it is an impossible situation. They tell us that when they leave their flats one of these loiterers jumps out from behind the hedge in one of the nearby parks and robs them of their bags, cuts their clothes to pieces, etc. There are many of these cases. When the situation in the White areas has come to such a pass, action must be taken. What the situation is in the Bantu areas, around those cities, I can relate from hearsay. However, I have not yet met persons who state: “I have been assaulted,” or “I have been slashed,” or “My husband has landed up in a mental institution because he was assaulted and had a nervous breakdown three weeks afterwards.” I want to make a particular appeal to the Minister, not so much to strengthen the police—although that would help—but to have research done in this connection. Such areas—and there must be other such areas—must be investigated to see what can be done to create job opportunities for the many people who do not have any work, so that one can indeed eliminate the problems that exist. Here I am thinking, in particular, of the problem of people who go hungry and consequently—I do not want to use the expression “are compelled” —are encouraged to commit murder and theft, etc. I would be grateful if the hon. the Deputy Minister would reply to this.

Mr. Chairman, since I cannot be enthusiastic in expressing my thanks to the relevant Minister in connection with a certain matter, you will probably permit me at least to express my appreciation to him within certain limits, i.e. for the long promised police station at Randburg for which we have already been waiting for three years in hopeful expectation. Though I cannot thank him for that, I nevertheless want to express my appreciation for the upgrading of Randburg as a police area in the sense that it is going to become a new headquarters for officers. We are particularly appreciative of that fact, particularly because we are convinced that Randburg has for a long time already had rightful claim to this.

In the second place, I should like to express my appreciation on behalf of the officials in Randburg for the better accommodation in the school buildings in Hendrik Verwoerd Avenue in Randburg. I paid a visit to those buildings and I must honestly say that I found the people much happier and much better situated than in the quarters in which they lived for so many years and where they made sacrifices in the interests of the public. I hope and trust that the ideal of the new buildings, which have been promised to us and for which the land has already been earmarked, will not be long in coming.

Then I should like to place on record the three very strong symbolic meanings the South African Police Force has for me personally. Firstly there is the symbolism of outward and inner neatness. It is very interesting to note, and not merely by chance, that one does not find a single individual amonst Police officials with a long beard or long hair, the fashion of the civilization of the Middle Ages and of modern barbarism. It is specifically these officials who have to combat this “civilization” today and who do so in masterly fashion. I am referring, for example, to the dagga smugglers, the drug peddlards and the loitteres. I want to say to the relevant Minister and the Chief of Police and his officials that the symbolic significance of outward and spiritual neatness impresses the public and that we have very great appreciation for that fact. In addition the Police Force symbolises for us today the protection of private property. I personally—and I can speak on behalf of many members of the public—have had my car broken into in Johannesburg on a Friday evening. On Saturday morning, before I could lay a charge at Standerton, the police phoned me, referred to the incident and asked whether I had suffered any loss personally. This is the symbol of the protection and the safety of private property and also private life. In that respect the Force today is to us of strong symbolic, cogent and reassuring significance. Thirdly the policemen, White and non-White, are also a symbol to us of our national safety and security. Here we do not have a case of dialogue, discipline and diplomacy—call them what you will—but of members in the same Force that are sufficiently strongly motivated to be able to act as one man, individually and jointly, to safeguard our State against a common enemy, terrorism and communism. We take note of and pay tribute to them for the basis on which this is done. Notwithstanding the fact that they consist of Brown Black and White members, there can be no doubt whatsoever, in reality, about their sense of loyalty, their orientation and their motivation when it comes to the safety and security of this State as a representative of Western civilization. This is much more than can be said of all members of this House today. I think that we have here an example of where loyalty begins and ends. We have here an example of a balanced spirit, an example of the personification and the irradiation of this balanced spirit as revealed in outward neatness. I should like to have this acknowledgement and this confession placed on record since we have expressed our very great appreciation and thanks to the Minister and the Chief of the Police Force and to all members of the Force, White, Brown and Black.

Mr. Chairman, I did rise once before, but I did not actually do what I initially wanted to do when I rose the first time, namely to identify myself, too, with the tribute paid by the hon. the Minister to Gen. Joubert, who is retiring in November. I have had the privilege of working very closely with Gen. Joubert for nine months. As far as I am concerned, he is a prototype of a policeman, he is a policeman’s policeman. If one should get him on one of those programmes where one has to guess the occupations of the guest personalities, I think nobody wil guess wrongly as far as he is concerned. To my mind he looks like a policeman, acts like a policeman—he is a policeman in every respect. He is also a person who goes where the action is. He is a person who can use his discretion. He is a person who is known to me and to the hon. the Minister as a man of initiative. I wish him and his very good wife a very well-earned retirement, and I want to thank him very much for the very pleasant time we have had in the nine months during which we have been working together and which we shall have in the time during which we shall still be-working together. I want to give him the assurance that the little I know about police-work, and that is still very little, I have in fact learned from him. Then I want to extend a very warm welcome to Gen. Crous as the future Commissioner of Police. He is a person with whom I have also been working for nine months, and I want to express confidence that he will bring a great deal of honour to our Force and that he will experience a very successful and pleasant period of office as Commissioner of Police.

Then I should like to refer to the annual report of the Force. On page 1 hon. members will find a roll of honour reflecting deaths that have occurred. It appears from this roll of honour that during the year in question 26 members of the Force lost their lives in the course of the execution of their duties. On behalf of my department I should like to express my sympathy to their next of kin, and I want to pay tribute to the deceased members of the Police Force. I had the opportunity to attend the funeral of two of the four Bantu members of the Force who were buried here in the Republic. I want to give hon. members the assurance that the funeral of these two non-Whites was a military funeral and that it felt as though we had lost a part of us. I have often said this before and I say it again, namely that the Police Force is a Force which is one big family. When these brave men lost their lives, the feeling of the policemen attending the funeral, the feeling for their fellow-companions, was absolutely tangible. Under the heading “honourable mention and awards” in the report hon. members will also find that Police Star decorations were awarded to Lt.-Gen. Bester, who has just retired, and to Lt.-Gen. T. J. Crous, who will be the future Commissioner of Police. In addition there were other persons who were awarded the Police Medal for Faithful Service, and others who were specially commended. I want to convey to all of them my congratulations on having received honourable mention for their work. These are the men who bring credit to the Force, the men who build up the Force and the men who lend prestige to the Force. They are doing so along with the thousands of other members of the Police Force who are faithfully doing their duty.

I also want to refer to the police salaries that were announced here this afternoon. I should like to reply to the hon. member for Durban North in this regard. In a previous debate he challenged me to tell him what we were going to do in regard to police salaries. I am very grateful that he did so. I am very grateful that the hon. member took the trouble to bring up the matter. However, I want to give him the assurance that the day he challenged me in the previous debate, this matter had for the most part already been clinched. By that time we had already reached the stage where all we still had to do, was to go to the Treasury.

Has the matter now been clinched completely?

Yes, it has now been clinched completely. The new salaries are already being paid. The Minister of Police and I do not tell you what we are going to do; we tell you what we have already done. Sir, may I tell you that when I entered this department, the Minister’s first instruction to me was to investigate the salary position. We worked on that for a long time before we arrived at this system. First of all we had to decide whether we had to consolidate the ordinary service allowance with the salary. We had to devise other plans. We had to find something which would be acceptable to all three of the bodies through which we would have to go. It is not so easy simply to say, “You are getting another R30 ir R40 or R50 or even R100.” We should very much have liked to do so. We do not begrudge our policemen big salaries, but we are members of the Public Service. I want to tell you, Sir, that I do not want to be derogatory to any person when I say that the people in the Public Service are also people who are working hard. As our policemen are also members of the Public Service, they fall under the Public Service Commission. I on my part do not wish to debate today the question of whether or not the Police Force should fall under the Public Service Commission. I want to content myself with saying that although hon. members opposite are continually comparing the position of our policemen with that of the railway policemen, this is something which is not in our hands. The Railway Police form part of the South African Railways and Harbours, and they fall outside the Public Service Commission. There is nothing I can do about that. It is analogous with the private sector. For instance, I cannot help it if there is a private body paying its night watchmen more than we are paying our policemen. We are not responsible for that. I can tell hon. members now that there is no point in trying to draw comparisons between the two Services. That is quite out of the question; we cannot pay those salaries. We cannot do so because we are part of the Public Service. Our problem— in other words, the problem with which the Minister and the Commissioner and I have to contend—was to determine a salary which would in fact fit in with that specific service rendered by the police. I want to repeat that public servants also work very hard. I know this; I am also a Deputy Minister of theirs. Public servants also work overtime, but this is the difference: The public servant can lay down his pen at 5 o’clock, or whatever the time may be, but the policeman is not always in a position to do so. If the policeman is investigating a case and is, for instance, on the point of making an arrest and the clock strikes 5 o’clock, he cannot leave his work and arrest that person the next day. He has to carry on with his work. Then there is also the question of the dangerous working conditions, which do not apply to the ordinary public servant. The policeman has to deal with that programme of action in which he finds himself. There is the possiblity that he has to enter certain places in the dark, which is not pleasant. Those dangers exist for the policeman, and therefore we decided to grant an additional allowance for that aspect of the policeman’s duties. I know that the Public Service in general will not begrudge the Police Force this allowance of R30, which all policemen have been receiving since 1st April.

Sir, it is all very well to tell us that a policeman should get even more. But I want to point out that the policeman receives many benefits. We should not forget that the policeman has a free medical scheme. In addition there are other allowances which he receives. If he goes to the north, he receives an additional allowance. Then there are all sorts of small allowances which are also added to his salary. I want to add that police work is not only salary work. There are many members in this House who are very capable people. Hon. members may use themselves as an analogy. They could all have earned better salaries outside this House, but they have a love of this kind of work. This is also the case with the police. When a person decides to become a policeman, he enters the service irrespective of the salary. One of the strangest things I have ever experienced, was to find that once a person has landed in the Police Force, he always returns to the Force. I may just tell you, Sir, that the people we find easiest to recruit are the sons of policemen. Once one has landed in that Force, it gains a hold on one. If one likes that kind of work, it is one of the most satisfactory kinds of work one can find. Therefore I want to say that, irrespective of the salary, it is a pleasant service. The task performed by these people for their country is a real one. Then I just want to mention—and this will perhaps astonish the hon. member for Pinelands— what the position was after 1st April when these salary increases were granted. In April we had 106 applications for re-employment, as against only 18 similar applications and 35 applications for resignation during a period of two weeks in the previous month. Sir, I have high hopes that these new, attractive salary scales will bear good fruit. The men complained to me and said, “We are not asking for the world. We are not asking for the highest salaries in the country. We just want recognition for the dangerous conditions under which we are working, for the overtime we have to work.” I think we have now granted them that recognition. I have every confidence that people who now want to enter the Police Force, will enjoy the work in the knowledge that we do have appreciation for it and that we are going to do our best for them.

I just want to refer to the question of housing. As far back as during the ’sixties it was approved that police officials be provided with 100% housing. The ideal we have set ourselves is to make provision for every policeman who would like to live in a house or in a flat, so that he may rent one of the houses or flats of the Police Department. We are fast approaching that state of affairs. During the year under review, which ended on 30th June, 1972, the following additional accommodation was provided: 414 flats units, 84 dwellings and single accommodation for 133 members of the Force. You will understand, Sir, that this system is being administered, and that these houses are being given to us, by the Department of Community Development, the result being that we as the Police Force are subject to certain other things as well. The money has to be available, the building programme has to be up to date, etc. As I have said, our ideal is to provide housing for all members of the Force. We have laid that down as a matter of policy, and we are constantly trying to reach that 100% situation. Apart from that the policeman is also in a position to get a 100% housing loan. In addition to that he is also eligible for a subsidized interest rate, which is the same as the one that applies to the rest of the Public Service. The policeman may also avail himself of the usual Public Service facilities.

I want to mention a few examples of the good work being done by the South African Police. Appreciation was also expressed by members opposite for the conduct of the police during the strikes in Durban and the slight disturbances we had there. I think all of us realize that the police acquitted themselves very honourably there. I think that the image of the police was enhanced as a result of the mature way in which they handled the whole situation there. I want to extend my hearty congratulations to the division concerned on the fine way in which they acquitted themselves. Let us take next the example of the conduct of the police at the South African Games. All of us are aware that the South African Games were a new departure in our body politic. All of us were aware that we had to do here with a ticklish situation. All of us were aware that an explosive situation could develop here. All of us were aware that during the Olympic Games in Munich last year there had been Arab terrorists who had shot and killed Israeli athletes, and we had Israeli athletes here in our country. In other words, on a small scale we had here the whole situation which existed in Munich in Germany at the time. I can give the Committee the assurance that our police were aware of that. The Commissioner of Police had to make a provision for that. People who were in Pretoria know about all the places where the police were present, the fine manner in which they acted there and the unobtrusive manner in which they handled matters. I think that the success of the Games is to a large extent also attributable to the manner in which the police acquitted themselves. In this regard, too, I want to congratulate them heartily.

Sir, I want to mention to you just a few examples of our normal police activities. On 19th January, 1973, Arthur Vorster of the Berea was stabbed to death by a Bantu robber. There were no clues at all. On 7th February already the police arrested a Bantu person, Johannes Majemele. There were absolutely no clues at the scene of the crime. Take, for instance, the case here in Cape Town of Sharon Ashford, who was found dead in her mother’s house on the 3rd. Two days later the police had this young man, Morton, behind bars. Sir, that is splendid police work.

Was he convicted?

No, the case is still pending. On 18th January of this year members of the unit at Reitz went to the Orange Free State on the strength of certain information, and on a train they found five Bantu men, with fire-arms in their possession, and then they found out, through keen ingenuity and detective work, that this was a gang. That gang was subsequently charged with a murder; there were nine charges of armed robbery against them, three charges of attempted murder and two charges of escape. Sir, that was splendid police work, and we want to extend our congratulations to all concerned. Let us also take, for instance, the armed robbery of the Volkskas Bank at Wadeville, where two Whites robbed the bank of R9 185. When they jumped into the waiting motor-car, the murder and robbery division of the East Rand Branch arrested them on the spot. Sir, that is splendid police work. And we are very proud of those policemen.

Sir, I have already spoken about the use of fire-arms. I just want to give hon. members one more set of statistics on fire-arms. The hon. member for Houghton told us here how the police were allegedly shooting people. I have now obtained the statistics in regard to assaults on the police. Sir, it is strange that the hon. member for Houghton never asks for statistics of this kind. If she had asked us how many assaults there had been on the police, we could have furnished her with the statistics, but all she asks all the time is how many people have been assaulted by the police. We have now had an extract made of the statistics relating to assaults on the police. Sir, do you know how many assaults there were on the police in 1972? There were 5 128 in that one year, and then some people want us to have the police do their rounds without revolvers, or are saying that our police shoot too quickly. In 1972 there were 5 128 assaults on our police! We cannot allow our policemen to be exposed to danger. I have every confidence in our police. I want to make an appeal to them. They are subject to regulations relating to the use of fire-arms. Sir, once a policeman has undergone his training in Pretoria and has been taught how to handle a pistol, I am confident that he will use his discretion, that he will not abuse his power, that he will be a friend to the public, and that he will not be a rogue. Sir, let us be very honest in this regard as well. We have more than 30 000 policemen in our Force. Their educational qualifications vary from Std. 7 to degrees, even doctors’ degrees. Under these circumstances one must not expect not to find an occasional black sheep amongst them. We are going to find black sheep amongst them; there are going to be cases where a policeman acted wrongly, where he did somthing which he should not have done, but as far as the 99% of the members of our Police Force are concerned, we as South Africans may be very proud of this Force and its conduct towards the public.

Just before dealing with the wishes and suggestions of the various speakers, I should like once again to make in general just two appeals. In the first place, I want to ask the public this: Our statistics show that the hitch-hiker is a person who causes a great deal of trouble. Hitch-hikers are the people who are accidentally knocked over and killed in road accidents. Firstly, the hitch-hiker stands in the road and one cannot see him. There he is knocked over and killed. Secondly, acting in all innocence, one may sometimes give a hitch-hiker a lift; one may think that one is doing him a good service and then, all of a sudden, a crime takes place, because one has in effect given a lift to a rogue. Actually, one wants to sound a warning against the hitch-hiker and ask the public please to refrain from hitch-hiking, if possible. One should rather not hitch-hike. You know, Sir, in the olden days, when I was a young man, it was an absolute principle that if one could not get to a certain place on foot or by bicycle, one stayed at home; that is a sound principle. If one could not go away from one’s village, one stayed there until one had worked hard enough, had saved money, could board a train and go on holiday. But to make use of another person’s petrol, his licence and everything so that one may have transport from one place to another, is not right. I want to concede that there are in fact cases where people must hitch-hike because they have no alternative, but we are all adults and we know what cases these are. However, let us be on our guard against hitch-hikers, please.

Then I want to say this to the elderly: We have many cases of elderly people being assaulted and raped. However, the remedy is a fairly easy one. These things would to a large extent be eliminated if those elderly people would only remain in contact with our police offices, the nearest one. Let the elderly gentleman or lady pay a visit to the district commandant and tell him that he or she is elderly and living on his or her own; give him the address and the telephone number so that the police may act if something should go wrong. That kind of contact between the police and the public will help a great deal to eliminate assaults of this kind. Then I want to make an appeal to the parents of juveniles. I see in the newspapers every day that young girls are raped or assaulted. Then one finds that at 3 o’clock in the morning such a girl was walking home from a club. Sir, what a child of 14 or 15 or 16 is doing in the streets at that time of the night, heaven alone knows. If the parents would look after their children and find out where they are, we would have far fewer cases of assault of this nature.

Now I am pleased to be able to say a few words about the various suggestions made by hon. members. I think I have already dealt fully with what the hon. member for Durban North asked me, namely the question of salaries. They also complained again about the shortage of policemen. Yes, there is a small shortage. I want to tell you, Sir, that if this figure remains as it has been over the past month, we ought to eliminate this shortage completely within a year’s time. But we want to do everything in our power to attract more people.

The hon. member for Berea touched upon a number of very valuable points. He is quite correct. He asked me what we were going to do since at least two-thirds of the dagga confiscated by us had been grown in the Reserves. That is quite correct. We believe, and we shall also arrange it that way, that the police will always have the right to help those homelands with the problem of combating the cultivation of dagga. The hon. member for Christiana mentioned that the homeland people should not be over-hasty with the take-over of police services. This is a very highly specialized service. For instance, just to have a brigadier there, takes 20 or 30 years of service and requires study and experience and the taking of courses. The Black people will in fact be able to man posts of that kind in due course, but this cannot be done overnight. The position is not the way President Kaunda of Zambia suggested, namely that one simply had to snap one’s fingers and then everything would be in order. Things cannot be done that way. We here in Southern Africa want everything to go ahead in an orderly manner, and we shall ensure that we do at least have agreements and that the patrolling aspect will always be maintained in conjunction with the Bantu homeland Governments, for it will be to our common good to do so. The hon. member also referred to dagga.

The hon. member for Potgietersrus asked whether we could introduce a system of women reservists. The policewomen are a very big success. We shall give attention to the question of women reservists. I do not know how many problems this will involve, but, on the other hand, it may of course bring about many solutions, too. I think the hon. member made a good point when he said that a man and his wife would then be able to go out together on patrol duty. They would then be able to go out and do their work, and the woman would at least know where her husband is while the man would know where his wife is.

I want to thank the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg City very much for what was in my humble opinion a very fine speech. I think it was a very fine speech of appreciation in respect of the South African Police. It was not only a speech of appreciation; it was a speech based on extensive knowledge as well as a speech based on study. He also referred to the salaries, and I have already replied to that. We are doing our level best. We are in favour of police servants receiving better salaries, but we are also realistic enough to know that this has to be effected within a certain context.

It compares so favourably now; he can come back to the police

I have virtually replied to the speech made by the hon. member for Christiana. He referred to the take-over of police stations and the manning of such stations by non-Whites.

He also referred to police housing, and I think I have already replied fully to that. We are giving attention to it at the moment.

The hon. member for Kensington asked me certain questions in regard to uniform, allowances. I think the hon. member’s figures were slightly wrong.

But these were the figures which the Minister furnished in reply to a question.

The amount which I am now going to mention to him may perhaps be different owing to a subsequent adjustment, but that does not really matter since the principle remains the same. A White officer gets R253 as a non recurring uniform allowance. A non-White officer gets R106 when he receives his first appointment as an officer, but after that he gets R66 a year as an additional uniform allowance. That is where the difference comes in.

The White officer also gets an additional allowance.

No, the White officer does not get any additional uniform allowance. The White officer gets a service allowance, which does not necessarily have anything to do with his uniform. The hon. member spoke about the first payment of money for a uniform. My premise is that we do give the White officer R253, but that it is a non-recurring payment for his uniform. The non-White officer gets R106 for his first uniform and after that he gets R66 a year. It must be remembered that a White officer has to acquire a sabre, has to buy a dress suit, and so forth. The non-White officer need not buy a sabre, and at this stage he does not really need a dress suit. That is why there is a difference between the allowances.

I think I have also replied to the speech made by the hon. member for Wonderboom. However, he also wanted to know whether we could not subsidize those families who were not availing themselves of official housing. Once again I must say that this would be a difficult situation, because we would have to obtain Cabinet approval, would have to approach the Public Service Commission and would also have to get past the Treasury, for something of that nature would mean an increase in the income of the police servant. However, I do not think that this system of subsidization will be necessary, for our object is to provide housing for policemen as soon as possible.

The hon. member for Pinelands was rather vague, and I did try to find out precisely what I had to reply to. He only said “crime is increasing and the criminals are getting braver”.

†I agree wholeheartedly with him because that is a fact. The hon. member wanted me to investigate why an English-speaking person does not want to join the Police Force. The hon. member stated that in his opinion English-speaking persons do not want to join the Police Force because they think that the Police Force comprises only Nats and that Nats are getting preferential treatment. I cannot see how I can investigate such a statement. The hon. member makes a categorical statement which is probably the result of an investigation. Why should I reinvestigate? I can really throw the question back at the hon. member and ask him why English-speaking persons feel that Nats are receiving preferential treatment. If he can tell me and produce proof of a single case in the Police Force where a well-known Nationalist received preference over an English-speaking policeman, I shall certainly take steps. I cannot go into a vague statement on what the hon. member seems to think the position is. I personally know that that is not the position. All I can do is to tell the hon. member that he is wrong. I want to quote a few examples. We have the case of Brig. Edelstein and I think he is a Jewish person. I am not even sure of that, but I know that he is certainly English speaking. There is Brig. Patel. There was the well-known case of Gen. Pat Dillon.

Was Pat Dillon an Englishman? [Interjections.]

I would suggest that he is a very conservative Englishman and I know some other conservative Englishmen too. I do not think it is a sin for an Englishman to be conservative. [Interjections.]

The hon. member also spoke about the raids. I do not have any statistics about the raids.

You should have.

Why should I have? I do not exactly know what the hon. member has in mind, but I can say how many people were picked up, how many people were charged, but I do not know more than that. This is one of the ways in which we clean up the streets.

*We have a shortage of men, and I have never denied that. I cannot go back to the system of the beat. We cannot walk up and down the streets. That time is past. There are too few policemen and too many people. However, we have all sorts of methods. We clean up areas. We send the police into an area of an evening, and we clean it up completely. This has an absolutely good effect. Here I have the following newspaper headlines: “Easter crime cut back by police clean-up.” It was cut back and there is no doubt about it. “570 held in huge Athlone clean-up.” This is what the police are doing. They are working on this. “Police in a big city crime-clean-up.” “Clean-up in the city.” “The police held 500 in an Easter blitz.” I may tell hon. members that this is very effective. “Police clean up the Cape.” This is how the police are working. They are working overtime. I want to shock the hon. member with the amount of overtime done by them.

I want to point out first of all that we appointed a departmental inspectorate. We caused a special investigation to be made into the opportunities for employment and other matters relating to the police. We found that there was an alarming increase in crime, which is a world phenomenon. We found that the number of cases had increased by more than a million during the period 1962 to 1972. Since 1967 we have been guarding our frontiers on a full-time basis. I am not going to furnish the figures in respect of how many men we have there, but I can say that we do not have as many there as the hon. member said we had. The police are doing passport and customs control on our borders with neighbouring states. We have 480 members who are doing this. We also have full-time special units in connection with combating stock theft along the borders with Lesotho and Swaziland. We are using 121 members for this purpose. We also have a special unit for contraband traffic in drugs and for locating and eradidicating dagga plants. We confiscated 2 177 408 kg of dagga to the value of R19 378 931. For that purpose we only used 74 members of the Force. We have a special unit which deals with tracing firearms in unlawful possession in Bantu reserves. We have a special unit for robbery and murder and criminal gangs. Since 1962 the Arms and Ammunition Act has been administered by the police. The relicensing of thousands upon thousands of fire-arms is being undertaken. We have to render services in regard to the registration of births and deaths. This is done by the police stations. We are also undertaking the agricultural census. The police call this the “pumpkin list”. Do you know how many man-hours we are using for this?— 2 300 00 man-hours in administrative work. Sir, this is a tremendous number of hours. Do you know how many hours the police worked overtime?—5 798 564 hours were worked by these 3 191 men.

At that small salary?

What does the hon. member mean by “that small salary”? I myself am working just as hard for just as small a salary. One works for the love of the cause too, and not always for money. I am not like that hon. member, who retired and is drawing a nice, fat pension, and then came to Parliament and now receives another salary. Other members of Parliament are only getting a salary.

The hon. member for Hercules raised two matters. He said we had to get rid of the leather harness used by the police. I do not want to comment on that, because it is something which has to be investigated departmentally. But what the hon. member said is quite correct: In a fight the leather harness provides a very handy handhold. Whether one should retain it because of the contribution it makes to the neat appearance of a policeman, or whether one should abolish it because it provides a rogue with a handhold on a policeman, I do not know.

The hon. member made a very good point in regard to the dog masters. The dog master has the problem that the dog sits with him in the motor car. When that dog has been running and comes back to the motor car, it sweats. What does it sweat through? It sweats through its mouth. The slaver drops on to the dog-master’s uniform. The dog also sheds its hair. He is always busy with the dog. The dog is always with him. I can imagine that a person’s uniform has a very hard time in such circumstances, when one is busy with a dog all the time. But this is a departmental matter, and I understand that they now have a different trouser design for the dog masters. The request made by the hon. member for Hercules has therefore been acceded to already.

The hon. member for Umlazi asked that we appoint the Commissioners for longer periods. I think the hon. member has a good case, namely that there should be a greater measure of continuity and a longer period for planning by the Commissioner. All of these are factors which will in fact be taken into consideration. The hon. member promised somebody from Eshowe that he would bring a certain case to our attention. If the hon. member would furnish me with the details and if there is something which he would like to be done, I would be prepared to order an inquiry at once and try to satisfy the hon. member and his voters in this regard.

The hon. member for Somerset East addressed some very fine words to the police. Like the hon. member for Wonderboom, he raised the question of a subsidy. I have already replied to that.

The hon. member for East London City submitted a very big problem to me, a problem of which I am well aware since I had experience of it in Pretoria as well as in Johannesburg. There is a homeland very close to Pretoria, too. A Bantu township developed there virtually over night, and we also had the problem there that the area was not properly under Police authority. I can therefore understand what the hon. member is talking about, because I went and had a look at the Bantu township that had sprung up there. In conjunction with the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education we devised a plan and established a police station there. To accommodate the hon. member for East London City I am prepared to go and have a look at that area. I am prepared to get into touch with the Department of Bantu Administration and Development once again in order to see whether it is possible for us to make more policemen available there. A very real problem develops when Bantu from the homeland flock in large numbers to their places of work and townships spring up there. The hon. member is quite correct. We do not have enough policemen there. I am quite prepared to join the hon. member at some time or other in carrying out an inspection of that area. I shall take the Deputy Minister of Bantu Administration and Education along with me, as I did in Pretoria. We shall then see whether it is possible for us to do something. That is all I can promise the hon. member. I cannot promise a solution, but I do promise that I shall help to think of a solution.

Finally I come to the hon. member for Randburg, who conveyed his thanks to us. We thank him for that. It is a fine thing when people thank one another; a motion of thanks is always a fine and positive motion. We established a temporary police station in his constituency. We want to give him the assurance that as soon as it is possible to make that a permanent police station, we shall erect the building. We shall help him in Randburg in that respect. It is no use laughing; we shall, in any case, take Randburg again at the next election.

May I ask a question? I asked the hon. the Deputy Minister whether he would deal with the low intake of Coloured recruits into the Police Force?

Yes. I am sorry that I did not deal with it. Once again it is the age-old problem of human relationships which is cropping up here. The low figure mentioned by the hon. member in this regard is due to the fact that salary increases suddenly took place everywhere. After these increases the Coloureds were lured away from the Police Force. With the new salary adjustment in the Force we hope that more Coloureds will be added to the Force. I want to ask hon. members to build up the image of the Police among the Coloured people. If the work of policeman is given status, the Coloureds will come to us. But if one allows the general feeling to develop that a policeman is something appalling, then people do not want to become policemen. This is merely a case of all of us having to help one another in order ot ensure more successful recruitment.

I want to thank all members who took part in this debate for their positive contributions and also for their criticism. I appreciate them. I want to extend to the Commissioner of the Force the congratulations of this Committee. We want to express the hope that a very fruitful year lies ahead for the Police Force, and that there will be several improvements when we debate police matters on this Vote next year.

Vote agreed to.

Revenue Vote No. 23, Loan Vote E and S.W.A. Vote No. 12—“Water Affairs”:

Mr. Chairman, because of the lateness of the hour, the hon. member for South Coast will ask for the privilege of the half-hour to deal with this Vote next week, when this debate will be continued. In the meantime, I am taking the opportunity to ask the hon. the Minister a few questions in connection with the progress made as regards weather modification. I think the hon. the Minister will agree that this subject is receiving more and more interest in the Republic. But I have a sneaking feeling that perhaps sufficient progress is not being made in this important field. The subject is causing great interest amongst farmers, because they are the people that are most urgently affected by drought. One hears of many instances where at farmers’ meetings they have discussions with overseas representatives and companies interested in rain making. I have a cutting here from a reliable newspaper, not the Sunday Times, but the Graaff-Reinet Advertiser, where it is stated: “A U.S. company will seed clouds at 15c per hectare”. They have had a meeting, but I have feeling that these farmers can very easily be led astray by wild promises made by people from overseas who believe at this stage that they can modify the weather say, for instance, in the Karoo. I believe such a presumption is premature. But at the same time I believe this is a subject that deserves the urgent attention of the Government, because I believe from information available to me that scientifically great strides are being made, and I believe something can well be done. I am not one of those who believe that we can modify the weather in the more arid regions on a large scale, as for example in the Karoo, but I believe there is a great potential for increasing the rainfall in the catchment areas of our big rivers to increase the river flow and in that way to increase the turnover capacity of our major dams. It is in this respect that my greatest interest lies.

The hon. the Minister was good enough recently to visit our area, namely Graaff-Reinet, when he indicated to that community that the Orange River development scheme could not be extended to the upper reaches of the Sundays River. I accept his arguments as being completely valid, but here is an area where perhaps precipitation could increase the flow in the upper reaches of the Sundays River and in that way use the full capacity not only of Lake Mentz but also of the Van Ryneveld’s Pass Dam. As the hon. the Minister knows, we passed two Acts here in this Parliament dealing with weather modification control. The hon. the Minister of Water Affairs together with his colleague, the hon. the Minister of Transport, share the responsibility of dealing with activities that alter natural weather conditions in our country. One gets the impression that the State is sympathetic towards weather modification. I believe that the time has arrived for more than sympathy. If one reads the documents that are available to one, one gets the immediate impression that there is a certain amount of misunderstanding, I would not call it discord, amongst the various departments who are naturally interested in weather modification. One thinks of the National Physical Research Laboratory, the Department of Technical Services and of the Weather Bureau, which falls under the Department of Transport. If one reads what goes on, one sees that every time there is a proposal that something should be done, the one department seems unable to agree with the other department and eventually the proposal is shelved and nothing further seems to happen. One is also concerned about the fact that of what has been done so far, most of the finance, has come from private institutions. As the hon. the Minister will know the prevention of hail interests tobacco and other crop-producing farmers. They have interested themselves in hail prevention and have voted very considerable sums of money towards engaging overseas companies to undertake hail suppression in South Africa. There again it appears that the moneys that these co-ops have spent in hail suppression may exceed by far the losses they would have sustained under normal circumstances through hail. In other words, it does not appear that the results have been entirely satisfactory or worthwhile. To a certain extent this money has been wasted. The reasons for this is that these co-ops are interested in suppressing hail, but I think what is more important at this stage is to do more research to find out what the best methods are of not only suppressing hail but of causing increased precipitation. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister what has in fact been achieved so far and whether the time has not perhaps arrived to establish an authority for weather precipitation or weather modification in South Africa that can co-ordinate effectively all those departments that will obviously have to be engaged in this kind of activity. One thinks of the C.S.I.R. and their many different laboratories that will be involvel. I want to know if an estimate cannot be made of what kind of finance is required effectively and practically to undertake that kind of experimentation that can put this thing on a sound basis. I certainly do not think the time has arrived where individual farmer organizations, individual co-ops, should in an unco-ordinated way attempt to get people from overseas to come and do a job for them when they cannot be assured that that will be financially and economically wise.

I would also like to ask the hon. the Minister what steps are being taken to train personnel in South Africa to further this kind of work. What is the policy of the hon. the Minister and his colleagues in respect of training local personnel? It is all very well employing overseas personnel for these tasks, but are we also taking steps to train people here to do this work? I believe that at one stage there was a five-year programme drawn up and sponsored by the hon. the Minister’s department with a view to augmenting precipitation in South Africa. The hon. the Minister probably knows about this programme. I believe that this programme has not come to anything due to conflicting interests between the departments concerned.

Though I have many other facts here about the question of rain-making, my main reason for standing up here is to ask the hon. the Minister to make an authoritative statement as to how he sees the future programme with regard to the modification of the weather in this country, so that the farmers and the farmers’ organizations concerned do not get involved in wild-goose chases in respect of this important matter. As I say, a lot of money has been spent, much of it unwisely. I think that, if the hon. the Minister could make a statement and tell us exactly how he sees the future, this information will be well received in the country. I also want to plead with the hon. the Minister that he should lay down that the weather modification authority I suggested should take into account all the people concerned. I believe that would be a step in the right direction.

Mr.

Chairman, I know that the matter of weather modification which the hon. member mentioned here, is at present receiving the attention of the hon. the Minister and his department. This is a completely new field, a scientific field, and I know that the hon. the Minister will reply to him in full in this connection. I shall therefore leave it at that.

We can say without fear of contradiction that this Minister and his department are diligently and unselfishly giving of their best to South Africa every day as far as water is concerned. I say without fear of contradiction that water affairs in South Africa have never before been on such a high level as in the past few years under this hon. Minister. It has achieved such a high level that in some countries of the world we are even being regarded and held up as an example.

We all realize that water is indispensable for the survival of man, animal and plant. It is said that one can live for 30 days without food, but only seven days without water. Pure water must therefore always be available in sufficient quantities for man, to prevent droughts, disease, etc. For that reason it is true that we have learnt from the history of the world that a lack of pure water has in the past been the cause of great problems and disasters in the world.

No one can go without food; we know that. At the same time we know that no food can be produced without water. So, for example—I shall mention it to you very briefly—it requires 7 200 litres of water to produce one pound of beef; 1 350 litres of water to produce one loaf of bread, 225 litres of water for one ear of maize; and 6 300 litres of water for one batch of potatoes. It is therefore possible to argue about water to one’s heart’s content. One can use water for any purpose, but the cycle of water always completes itself with man. In all respects, directly and indirectly, water is being used in the interests of man. For interest’s sake I tried to determine who the oldest human consumers of water are in the world today. I did not succeed in determining the very latest position, but I did succeed in determining who the three oldest people in the world were on 15th May, 1971; i.e. the three oldest consumers of water in the world. The third oldest was an Englishman. I think that it will be very encouraging to my friends here to know that they spring from such a hardy breed. This old English gentleman by the name of John Turner was 115 years old on 15th May, 1971. The second oldest man in May, 1971, was a German by the name of Karl Cloeckner. He was 126 years old. The very oldest person—and perhaps it is not so pleasant for us to think that these people are so strong—was a gentleman by the name of Shirali Muslimov, a Russian. He was 162 years old in May, 1971. It was also said that this old man, this Russian, has consumed 11 232 litres of drinking water alone.

South Africa is a big country which is unfortunately not richly endowed in water resources. South Africa, with its tremendous development in every sphere, will therefore be able to go as far as its water resources will permit. It is therefore interesting to note the following data: The position in the largest industrial area in South Africa, namely the Witwatersrand and the Vaal triangle, is that in 1950 the per capita consumption in the area supplied by the Rand Water Board was about 39 gallons per day while today it is about 70 gallons per day. According to data which has been made available, 837 million gallons per day are at present being abstracted from the Vaal River, of which 340 million gallons are being used for municipal and industrial purposes. Then we see the disturbing fact that 125 million gallons of water are being lost daily through evaporation and wastage. This scientific article goes on to say that the position will be something like this by the year 1980: 1 050 million gallons will be used in that area daily. By 1969 the daily consumption in that area will be 1 840 million gallons and in the year 2000 the consumption will also be about 1 840 million gallons of water per day. In other words the demand by the year 2000 will be 1 000 million gallons of water per day more than the Vaal River can provide; an extremely disturbing thought. It is therefore clear that we shall have to do two things in future. We shall have to use our water resources in the most scientific and the most economical way. In the second place we shall have to conserve, conserve and once again conserve. Every South African can make a valuable contribution in this field.

We are reminded of the daily consumer of water, the man, the woman and the child who open a tap and do not close it properly. Thousands and thousands of gallons of water are being lost in this way. Much water is also being lost as a result of leaking garden hoses, etc. It is interesting that someone has ascertained—and here the South African Railways set an outstanding example—that if the trains were not provided with self-regulating taps but with ordinary screw taps the water in the trains would only have been sufficient for the journey from Johannesburg to Klerksdorp. Because trains are provided with self-regulating taps, the same quantity of water is sufficient for the journey from Johannesburg to Cape Town.

Our farmers are our biggest consumers of water. It is said that 112 million gallons of water are being used daily in the Vaalhartz area. The farmers, in other words, can also effect the greatest saving of water. It is said that one needs 26 000 gallons of water to irrigate one morgen of land by means of spray-irrigation. As against this one needs 50 000 to 60 000 gallons of water to irrigate that same morgen of ground by means of flood irrigation. In other words, if spray-irrigation were to be used everywhere, a 50% saving of water could be effected by the farmers.

Another good method of conservation is the re-use of water. I quote a report of two years ago (translation)—

It is another interesting fact that this purified water is said to be even purer and clearner than the ordinary natural water. It is therefore true that as far as water is concerned, we shall have to subject ourselves and our children to the strictest discipline in order to develop this beautiful land of ours as well as possible in every sphere and develop it ever further so that it will not come to a halt through a lack of water. I believe that South Africa, although it does not have extensive water resources, will in fact, by means of the correct methods and the correct approach by its inhabitants, be able to get through in future with the water at its disposal.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.

House Resumed:

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.