Mr. Speaker, I move—

At a general meeting of the members of both Houses of Parliament held on Thursday, 14 February 1974, a medical scheme for members of Parliament was established, and application for the registration of the scheme under the provisions of the Medical Scheme Act, 1967, has been made to the Registrar of Medical Schemes.

The main provision of the Bill before the House is to make membership of the scheme compulsory for members of the Senate and of the House of Assembly. Compulsory membership is an essential requirement for the success of a medical scheme for members of Parliament because of the limited number of members eligible for the scheme. The Bill also authorizes the accounting officers concerned to deduct members’ contributions to the scheme from their salaries. That is all as far as the Bill is concerned.

The Rules of the scheme were adopted at the foundation meeting and are not under consideration at the moment.

*Mr. Speaker, you will allow me to say a few words on this occasion concerning the adoption of the scheme to which members of this House have been looking forward for many years. You are aware of the fact that several attempts have been made through the years to establish such a scheme, and that up to now these attempts have always failed. In the meantime, because of the constantly increasing cost of medical services and medicine, we have all become more and more convinced of the urgent need for such a scheme.

Many hon. members have had to incur great medical expenses, for which they had to pay from their own pockets because of the absence of such a scheme. It is true that a number of members belonged to medical schemes on an individual basis, but this meant high contributions and for this reason many members did not join such schemes.

Consequently it is a privilege to me as a member with approximately 31 years’ parliamentary service, and on the eve of my retirement from Parliament, to introduce this Bill which is making the benefits of a medical scheme available to present as well as future members and their dependants. It is a form of insurance and protection for members and their families and we are very glad that they will enjoy it.

Mr. Speaker, a considerable percentage of the population of South Africa already belongs to medical schemes. The fact that Parliament has established its own scheme should serve as encouragement to other groups of persons and employers who have not yet provided this to establish similar schemes. The State feels that both employee and employer should contribute, and that is exactly what is done in the case of the medical schemes of the Public Service and the South African Railways and Harbours. Now a similar step is being taken in this case as well, and I believe that the State is setting a commendable example to all employers in this regard.

To you, Mr. Speaker, I want to express my personal thanks and the thanks of the whole House for the initiative taken by you in the establishment of the scheme.

It involved a good deal of preparatory work and negotiations and Parliament will always be grateful to you for this important service which you rendered to members just before your retirement as Speaker. This is the most valuable of the invaluable services you have rendered as Speaker of this House. Please be assured of our sincere thanks and appreciation.

This measure enjoys the unanimous support of both sides of the House.

Mr. Speaker, we support the Second Reading of this Bill. As is well known, members in various professions in commerce and industry are in many cases associated with medical schemes. In the old days in China it was said that you paid your doctor when you were well and you paid him nothing when you were sick. Times have changed since those days. Today, you pay your doctor a considerable amount to keep you well and you also pay him a considerable amount when you are ill. Members of this House have been conscious of the burden of medical expenses for some time now and felt that it was only right that they should get together to work out the details of a contributory medical scheme.

I wish to associate myself, Mr. Speaker, with the remarks of the hon. the Minister of Transport in regard to yourself and to say that we support the Second Reading of this Bill which is in the interests of members of both Houses of Parliament.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

In the main this measure deals with the Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates.

For some time now a need has been felt to make the Post Office Savings Bank a more efficient and attractive savings facility for the public, and, with the help of the savings facilities, to encourage thrift amongst the public—particularly amongst the school-going youth—on a larger scale.

The measures proposed in this Bill will enable the Post Office to promote these objectives energetically.

What we plan to do is to offer the public improved savings bank facilities simultaneously with the change-over of the Post Office Savings Bank to a computerized system later this year.

The most important improvements we want to bring about are; an increase in the amount of payments on demand from R30 to R100 at one time, the calculation of interest on ordinary deposits and on Savings Bank certificates, i.e. fixed deposits, on daily balance instead of monthly, and more expeditious and easier methods for the public to invest in and obtain repayment of savings bank certificates.

With its large number of offices (1743) throughout the country, even at very small places, the Post Office is indeed in a position to give the public a savings bank service second to none.

In one important respect, however, a shortcoming affecting the efficiency of the Post Office Savings Bank has long been felt to exist, and that is that the Post Office Savings Bank is not operated by the Post Office for its own account. Up to now it has been managed by the Post Office, but only as an agent for the Treasury and for the account of the Exchequer.

One cannot expect anyone managing a business as an agent for another person to achieve the same degree of success as he could have achieved if it were his own business. He lacks the true motivation to realize the full potential of the business. It was for that reason that the Post Office asked that the Post Office Savings Bank be placed under its sole control so that it might develop it to optimum efficiency in the interests of the country.

In consequence of these representations the Minister of Finance appointed an inter-departmental committee under the chairmanship of a senior official of the Treasury last year to investigate the matter and related aspects.

The committee’s finding was that it was desirable that not only the Post Office Savings Bank, but also National Savings Certificates and the RSA Savings Service which is at present vested in the Treasury, be placed under the sole control of the Post Office. Its recommendations, which have all been accepted by the Government and which are being carried into effect by means of this Bill before this House, amount to the following as far as the Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates are concerned—

1. (a) That both the Post Office Savings Bank and the National Savings Certificates be transferred to the Post Office to be operated for its own account, and that the Post Office itself be empowered to make new issues of National Savings Certificates, with the proviso that the interest rates charged in respect of both the Savings Bank and the National Savings Certificates shall be subject to the approval of the Minister of Finance;
2. (b) that from the time of transfer, deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank and the proceeds from National Savings Certificates shall no longer be channelled to the Public Debt Commissioners for investment, but to the Post Office Fund. The moneys may be invested by the Post Office itself or utilized for capital—and other expenditure, and the Post Office may realize its investments after consultation with the Public Debt Commissioners;
3. (c) that the tax exemptions in respect of interest on Post Office Savings Bank deposits and National Savings Certificates shall remain;
4. (d) that after transfer, the revenue and assets of the Post Office shall serve as security for Post Office Savings Bank deposits and National Savings Certificates; and
5. (e) that all moneys or investments at present held by the Treasury or the Public Debt Commissioners in respect of the Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates, be transferred to the Post Office Fund.

†Mr. Speaker, as regards the RSA Savings Service, to which I have referred, I should like to mention here that that is the name of a division of the Treasury established in 1969 to take over the work of the former National Thrift Organization. It has a staff of 23, and its main aim is the general promotion of thrift. The service provides guidance and assistance in the use of the tax-free State savings and investment facilities offered by the Post Office Savings Bank, National Savings Certificates and Treasury bonds.

Arrangements are being made for the transfer of the Savings Service to the Post Office with effect from 1 April 1974, as also the transfer of the present staff who elect such transfer.

The amendments to the Post Office Act and several other Acts proposed by this Bill to give effect to the recommendations of the committee which I have summarized, are of a purely administrative character.

Clause 6 provides for the repeal of section 66 of the Post Office Act, which embodies the main existing arrangements whereby the Post Office manages the Post Office Savings Bank on behalf of the Exchequer. Likewise, clause 18 provides for the repeal of section 14 of the General Loans Act, under which a similar arrangement applies with regard to National Savings Certificates.

In substitution for the arrangements now embodied in section 66 of the Post Office Act and section 14 of the General Loans Act, clause 21 provides for deposits in the Savings Bank, the proceeds of the investment of such deposits and the proceeds of issues of National Savings Certificates to be paid into the Post Office Fund. The proposed new sections 77A and 77B inserted in the Post Office Act by clause 13, empower the Post Office itself to issue National Savings Certificates and incorporate existing provisions of the General Loans Act, relating to National Savings Certificates, in the Post Office Act.

The new section 4A inserted in the Post Office Re-adjustment Act by clause 22 of the Bill, empowers the Post Office itself to invest money available in the Post Office Fund instead of transferring such money to the Public Debt Commissioners for investment on behalf of the Fund. The Post Office is also being empowered to sell securities held as investments when it is considered advisable to do so.

The interest rates payable on ordinary deposits in the Savings Bank, Savings Bank certificates and National Savings Certificates, are made subject to the approval of the Minister of Finance as the central monetary authority of the Republic. This is done by the amendments proposed by Clauses 4 and 11 and subsections 3(b) and (4) of the proposed new Section 77A of the Post Office Act that I have already referred to.

Clause 28 deals with the arrangements for the transfer of money and securities now held by the Treasury and the Public Debt Commissioners in respect of the Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates, to the Post Office Fund.

The provisions I have mentioned are the main new ones contained in this Bill, and I think the remaining details are more suited to discussion at the Committee Stage.

*Mr. Speaker, the moneys and investments which the Post Office will receive from the Treasury and the Public Debt Commissioners at the time of the takeover, total approximately R275 million of which only about R14 million will be in cash. In the main the investments are in the form of government stock, some of which mature every year or two as from 1975 up to 1996. As the stock mature and cash consequently becomes available, the Post Office will be able to utilize those funds for capital expenditure, or to reinvest them as circumstances at the time may require. Similarly, new deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank and investments by the public in National Savings Certificates may be utilized for capital expenditure of the Post Office, or reinvested.

In addition if circumstances demanded it and it were desirable and justifiable, the Post Office could in case of need cash some of the unmatured securities at an acceptable loss and utilize the funds for capital purposes. Seen as a whole, the securities which are being made available to the Post Office constitute valuable reserve financing

I do not think I need emphasize that the Post Office, as a responsible Government organization, will control these funds responsibly and with due regard to the overall financial requirements of the State. As far as the utilization of the funds for capital purposes is concerned, I have to point out that this involves nothing new—this is precisely how the moneys invested in Government stock have always been utilized. It has nothing to do with the safety of the public’s investments—they remain investments in the State, which are certainly the safest investments there could be.

Since this measure paves the way for the development of a more efficient Post Office Savings Bank service in the interests of the country and at the same time, and this is as much in the interests of the country, means greater financial stability to the Post Office, I think I may confidently rely on receiving the full support of both sides of this House for this measure.

Mr. Speaker, the Opposition is not opposed to the basic principle contained in this Bill. In fact, we welcome it in so far as it is in line with our policy, as it has often been expressed in the past, of granting the Post Office a greater measure of autonomy. It does seem to me that the main reason why the hon. the Minister wants this Bill passed, is to provide a new source of funds, particularly capital funds, for the Post Office and for the Post Office Fund. That is a commendable aim to which we are not opposed, but it does seem to me to be an aim which is somewhat limited. I am sorry that in the hon. the Minister’s speech I failed to note any sign of real vision of what can be accomplished in future now that the Post Office Savings Bank is to become part of the whole Post Office set-up. I shall have something more to say about that later on.

The two main features of this Bill are: In the first place, the Post Office Savings Bank is now coming under the Post Office itself, and its funds will be going into the Post Office Fund which was created specially for purposes such as these a few years ago. Previously, as the Minister pointed out, the Post Office actually acted only as an agent for the scheme and for the bank. All the moneys were paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Now, in terms of this measure, the Post Office Savings Bank will become much more a genuine part of the whole Post Office set-up. At the same time and much better than before, the Post Office will now be entitled to issue National Savings Certificates and to invest the moneys in the Post Office Fund. Here, too, it has acted as an agent for the Treasury in the past and I think it is a good thing that the Post Office will have these new powers in future. Certificates up to a value of R2 000 can be taken out and the maximum period for which it can be taken out is 10 years. Both of these provisions are acceptable to us.

The reasons why we are not opposed to this Bill are as I have already indicated, firstly, that it falls within the broad pattern of Post Office autonomy which we have accepted on both sides of the House during the past year. We believe this might be a good source, even an untapped source for new capital because I do believe that under this set-up more money will be invested in Savings Certificates and in the Post Office Savings Bank than in the past. I have an idea that in the past the post offices had not been terribly enthusiastic about the Post Office Savings Bank or about the issuing of Union Loan Certificates and its successor, because quite naturally it did not have control over these two matters, e.g. it did not have all the profit and it could not use all the profits. Now, however, even if it is for psychological reasons, the Post Office will be able to do greater work with these two bodies as part of its whole composition.

We also welcome this Bill because it contains a provision in regard to the payment of interest on deposits and on Savings Certificates which we on this side of the House and particularly my hon. friend, the hon. member for Parktown, had pleaded for over many years. That is that the interest should be calculated in such a way that the funds which are placed in the Post Office Savings Bank and in certificates do not lie idle or without interest for periods of up to six or seven weeks. The change which has been made now is that interest will be payable on these deposits and certificates on daily balance. This I believe is a much sounder principle which we do accept.

I believe that this new set-up if properly handled can become the source of genuine profit for the Post Office. Perhaps the hon. the Minister could indicate to us whether he has made any projection for future years so as to see whether such profitability will result and how soon it will result under this legislation which we have before us. Later on I shall have something to say about the giro-system and how that is being used in Great Britain through their Post Office Savings Bank. This system is also being used in Holland and other countries actually to bring profit for the Post Office Savings Bank and the similar financial institutions which are set up within its bounds.

I do want to query some aspects of this Bill. Firstly, we are disappointed that the Consolidated Revenue Fund will no longer be the guarantor of the deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank. That has been the case in the past and every depositor knew that he had the Public Debt Commissioners and the whole of the Consolidated Revenue Fund as guarantors of all the deposits. Now that particular section of the principal Act, which was a safe one and a good one, is being repealed by this legislation. Section 77C on page 15 replaces that section and provides that the revenue and the assets of the Post Office department will be the security for the moneys deposited with the Post Office Savings Bank.

I am not for any moment suggesting that the Post Office will be very much less safe than the Government as a guarantee for deposits, It is after all, a Government institution and has enormous assets such as capital assets and assets in the form of buildings. I believe that these assets will be a guarantee for these deposits, but one can see in the future the possibility of the Post Office reaching such a state of autonomy where it will have so much charge of its own affairs that it will actually be responsible to a much greater extent for its revenue, for its income, for its profits and for its losses. At some or other unforeseen stage it may just arise that the profits have dropped so much that the liquid guarantee of the deposits might not be sufficient to cover it. This can happen if we have a sudden run on the banks as we have had during the depression in the United States.

To a certain extent this is speculation because I do not think it can occur during our lifetime. But it is something we must think about. There would then be the danger that the hon. the Minister might be tempted, as he has been tempted in the past, to increase tariffs. When one looks at our telephone tariffs one realizes that they are high enough as it is. We were a little alarmed when during the discussion of the Additional Estimates earlier this session the hon. the Minister told us that in this new Post Office set-up the funds might be used for a fund similar to the Rates Equalization Fund of the Railways. He made a big mistake in saying that and he corrected himself soon afterwards. While we were quite appalled at first, I think we were reasonably satisfied and relieved after he had corrected the mistake. But it only shows how, although the hon. the Minister made a mistake, a successor of his might try something similar which might indeed not redound to the safety of this particular bank. Again, I want to say that I do not expect anything like this to happen.

The next query is that the ordinary banking restraints which apply to the ordinary commercial banks do not and will not apply to the Post Office Savings Bank to the same extent. As the hon. the Minister knows, under our Banking Act our commercial banks are restricted through very strict rules and regulations inter alia as to the amount of liquid assets they hold and the amount of capital assets also. There seems to be no restriction placed on the Post Office Savings Bank as to the percentage of its assets that should be held in liquid form to be able to pay any short-term liability. These liabilities are normally back-payments to the public. I think that some or other provision should be made for that. In Holland, and I am now speaking under correction, I believe it is laid down that 20% of the assets of their Post Office Savings Bank which runs their giro-system be in the form of liquid assets. I see no provision, a provision very similar to that which applies to commercial banks, in this particular Bill which is now before us.

There is a second point which I would like to query in the Bill. We support the issue of the National Savings Certificate and are particularly happy to hear that the saving schemes in which many of us took part when we were young, will now be revived by something along similar lines. This idea of thrift at school will now be actively pursued in future. This is indeed something we welcome. We are a bit concerned about the fact that there seems to be no limit to the amount of National Savings Certificates that the Post Office can issue, apart, naturally, of the limit imposed by public demand, which, again, will depend on the interest rate that is paid. But it does seem to me a bit like the open-ended trusts. If the Post Office is in difficulty it can just issue as many National Savings Certificates as it wishes simply to get the money in, provided that the public wants them and provided that the interest rate is high enough. However, there is this check, that the hon. the Minister of Finance must be consulted in regard to the interest rates. That can, indeed, keep the public demand for National Savings Certificates limited. But it does seem a bit of a roundabout way of doing things and of trying to ensure that not too much money is drained from the market should there be a sudden demand for capital by the Post Office itself.

Anyway, these are matters which are not of such a nature as to move us to oppose this Bill. What I do feel concerned about is whether the hon. the Minister—I am not speaking about his department—will have the vision and show the initiative to make full use of this Bill once we have put it on the Statute Book as an Act. I believe, as I have said, that this Post Office Savings Bank can be made into a profitable institution by adopting the far-sighted methods which have been adopted in Great Britain, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden and France in regard to the giro-system in the Post Office Savings Bank. The hon. the Minister must know about it. I believe there has been some investigation too by our postal authorities in regard to this matter. In these countries the Post Office Savings Bank is an essential part of the economy. It is almost a banking institution similar to a commercial bank. In Holland you can go to Haarlem and fill in a form, a type of cheque, which you hand it at the Post Office there. After that it goes on to an account in Amsterdam, Delft or Utrecht or wherever you want it, even though it is paid into some other account. It is therefore not a question of taking out the money, sending it by post and paying it in again, but a direct operation. It has been done in Great Britain too. In fact, within three years they had this giro-system working almost perfectly in Great Britain. After three years, I think, they had almost 400 000 post office accounts of this nature. They have a huge installation at Bootle in Great Britain. The installation, which is fully computerized, is housed in a big building there. Within 24 hours after you have paid in your money at one post office, it can be paid into another account in a post office elsewhere in Great Britain. That facility is available to you, me and everyone who opens a post office account. In other words, anyone can use the post office savings bank anywhere under this particular system. I think that the aim is to have at least 1 200 000 of these accounts. In Britain, France and Holland you can pay your electricity account, your water account, your television licence, your telephone account, your insurance premiums, your mortgage payments and even your retail account through this system. Employers can even pay their wages and salaries through the post office account which is a universal bank for a particular country. The Post Office is in a unique position to take advantage of this. It has close on 2 000 outlets in this country which it can use for this particular purpose. I want to ask the hon. the Minister to start as soon as possible to investigate the possibilities of using the Bill now before us for a purpose such as this. I know that there are difficulties. There is, for instance, the capital cost. I think that this amounted to about £6 million in Britain, which is not a terribly big amount. There is the question of finding the labour. In Britain, I think, they needed 3 000 people to operate their system and, if proper use is made of our labour in South Africa, I believe we can start this giro-system in our country. I commend this system to the hon. Minister. It is not functioning exactly like a commercial bank. For instance, one cannot get overdrafts or anything of that nature from them. Actually, they do not even pay interest on your deposits, but neither do most of the commercial banks on daily balances nowadays. However, this is one instance of how I believe that, with this Bill and looking towards the future, we can say that within five years we shall have caught up with what is being done in the countries of Western Europe in making greater facilities available for the public, for the ordinary man who does not want to have a banking account and who does not like to draw postal orders or money orders and post those to have the money put into other accounts. If something like this can be done it will oil our economy; speed up the work of industry and of commerce and facilitate matters for the ordinary man in South Africa. If the hon. the Minister has this vision for the future, not only do we agree not to oppose this Bill, but we shall praise it and commend it to him and to the country.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member for Orange Grove has indicated, we on this side of the House are going to support this measure in principle. We are supporting it because we consider that something needs to be done to put some life into the Post Office Savings Bank. The performance of the Post Office Savings Bank over recent years has been anything but impressive as regards its ability to attract saving accounts and investments in National Savings Certificates. At the end of its last accounting period, which was on 31 March 1973, the Post Office Savings Bank accounts totalled something like R175 million, compared with the total in savings accounts in financial institutions in the private sector of something like R1 600 million. In other words, the Post Office Savings Bank was only responsible for something like 10% of the total amount invested in savings bank accounts. This performance is unimpressive particularly when account is taken of some of the advantages which apply to investment in Post Office savings accounts. I refer, firstly, to the tax advantages connected with the Post Office savings accounts which do not apply in the same measure to deposits in savings accounts with private institutions. I refer, secondly, to the convenience which the wide network of post offices offers to savings bank depositors, being able to deposit and withdraw at virtually any place convenient to them.

The Post Office should be playing a very much greater part in the promotion of thrift and in attracting savings than it has been playing. I believe that the original idea of the Post Office Savings Bank and the National Savings Certificates was the promotion of thrift. I do hope that this change in responsibility from running it on an agency basis to running it on a direct responsibility basis will have these effects which we are looking for. I also hope and expect that as a result of assuming direct control over the Post Office Savings Bank the Post Office is going to benefit by the more ready availability of funds to be used in its own organization. I hope that if that is so, the Post Office will be placed in a position where it will lean less heavily on its own internally generated funds for capital expansion than it has done up to the present, and that by doing so, it will be able to keep its charges down.

While supporting this Bill in principle we do think, as the hon. member for Orange Grove has indicated, that this is a Bill that can still be improved, because there is in my view one basic weakness in it, something which I shall come to in a moment. I might say that this Bill allows the Post Office and the Post Office Savings Bank to break many if not most, of the rules which the Government follows in controlling the operations of financial institutions, rules to ensure that banks and other financial institutions follow sound banking practices. Even the Reserve Bank is subject to certain restraints which the Post Office will not be subject to under this legislation. I do not think that that in itself matters very much provided this measure will improve the financial position of the Post Office and provided that depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank are in no way prejudiced. For instance, Sir, this Bill is going to give the Post Office, as a savings organization the right to run a bank and to use the funds that are generated in that bank to finance its own internal requirements of working capital and of fixed capital. This is a privilege which no other industrial or commercial undertaking is permitted in South Africa. It is also true, Sir, as the hon. member for Orange Grove mentioned, that the security which depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank enjoy is going to be reduced in terms of this measure, because the previous guarantee which was a guarantee by the coffers of the Treasury is going to be replaced by a guarantee by the coffers of the Post Office. Disappointing as it is, I do not consider this to be a vital issue because obviously the security of the coffers of the Post Office will be very adequate. The Post Office is also not being obliged, to keep any of its assets in prescribed assets, as the banks and other savings banks are required to do. Here again I do not consider this to be a matter we need necessarily concern ourselves about. I am quite satisfied that the Post Office Savings Bank investment in the assets of the Post Office will fulfil the same function as would investment in prescribed assets. What does concern me, however, is that there is no provision in this Bill that there should be any minimum liquid assets backing in respect of the deposits in either the Post Office Savings Bank or in National Savings Certificates. After all, it is only sound basic practice that short-term and medium-term liabilities to the public, deposits with banks by the public, should be backed by liquid assets to a minimum defined degree so that withdrawals, even withdrawals on a fairly major scale, can be met without difficulty. This I regard as a shortcoming in this Bill—that there is no provision for any minimum liquid assets backing in respect of deposists or in respect of National Savings Certificates. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister straightforwardly, when he replies to the Second Reading debate on this measure, to reply to this question: “What would the position be in regard to the Post Office Savings Bank if there were to be withdrawals on a fairly large scale?” Let us say that there were withdrawals amounting to R30 million and the Post Office Savings Bank did not at that stage have the cash or have assets which could readily be realized to meet those withdrawals? Would the Post Office go to the Reserve Bank? What would the position be if it were not convenient for the Reserve Bank to lend the Post Office that money? Would the Post Office go to the central Government? If the Post Office can go to the central Government, why then cancel the undertaking whereby the Consolidated Revenue Fund is in the final instance responsible for deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank?

Mr. Speaker, in view of the special nature of the Post Office and the Post Office Savings Bank and the obvious financial strength of the organization—we are talking here not about financial strength but about liquidity—I do not propose that this shortcoming in the proposed set-up of the Post Office Savings Bank should be met by stipulating that deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank should be backed by a specific liquid asset ratio. What I think would be appropriate would be to reinstate in this Bill a guarantee of deposits and of National Savings Certificates by the central Government. If that is done, it would be the revenues of the State which in the last resort would be available for providing the necessary liquidity against withdrawals by depositors from their Savings Bank accounts. I would ask the Minister to consult with the hon. the Minister of Finance to see whether this shortcoming in this proposed legislation could not be met in the way I have suggested.

Sir, the two hon. members on the United Party side who have taken part in this debate, have said that they support this legislation in principle, but they have come along with so many “buts” that it seems to me they are opposing it. The two hon. members mentioned a few points here; they both spoke about the same things. They object strongly to the fact that the Post Office Fund and not the Consolidated Revenue Fund will now guarantee deposits. But what is the difference, after all? Is the Post Office not a Government Department? Do the hon. members think for one moment that the State will allow a wing of the Post Office, autonomous though it may be, to go bankrupt? The hon. member for Orange Grove went looking for problems in the very distant future, problems which could not possibly occur even in the life hereafter and said that these things could in fact occur, and that the effect would be that Post Office tariffs would have to be increased. No, Sir, I think we should not make fools of ourselves when we criticize measures here. If their criticism had been valuable in any way, I should have supported them. If their suggestions had been worthwhile, I should have supported them. But what is the amount in the Post Office Savings Bank at present? It is R275 million. How far can it rise? Assume for the sake of argument the amount rises to R500 million. The Post Office will still be in possession of its assets of R500 million. We should remember that the Budget of the Post Office runs to millions. The hon. member is concerned at the possibility of the public suddenly wanting to withdraw their savings for some reason or other. He may be right, if the United Party were to come into power, because then everyone would want to withdraw their money from the Post Office Savings Bank. But surely nothing of the kind could happen. But even if such a thing were to happen, the Post Office would have sufficient funds; its income is big enough and it is selective enough. It is totally unnecessary for the Post Office suddenly to start struggling to obtain money in order to remain in a state of liquidity. In addition to that, the Post Office has its arrangements with the Reserve Bank, etc., for overdrafts which the Post Office has guaranteed. If it were to need money suddenly, it would be able to make use of these overdraft facilities. But what is more, the Post Office is, after all, also going to invest this money in stock, etc. The hon. the Minister stated very clearly that the money would be available immediately if the Post Office required R10 million, R12 million or R15 million for capital works, for example. Sir, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that it is totally unnecessary to take into account that argument raised by the hon. members. It carries no weight.

That is a very irresponsible attitude.

The hon. the Minister will never increase tariffs because the Post Office had suddenly ceased to be in a state of liquidity. Surely raising tariffs is not the only way of remaining in a state of liquidity; one takes other steps. Surely the hon. member knows that the Post Office is run on sound business principles. Any business concern ensures that it will always have funds available, unless it is half-way to bankruptcy of is taking risks. But no business concern run on sound business principles will ever allow itself to be so vulnerable.

Sir, both hon. members dragged the banks into this. The banks as such have nothing to do with this Post Office Savings Bank. The hon. member asks why provision is not made in the Bill for the Post Office to hold minimum liquid assets, as in the case of other financial institutions. But, Sir, here we are dealing with the Post Office, with a Government institution. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the private financial institutions.

What happened with Parity?

The hon. member asks me what happened with Parity. I think it is high time for me to say something about Parity again …

Order!

… but I shall say it on another occasion.

The hon. member should not allow himself to be led astray by people who would like to lead him astray.

Sir, the hon. members dragged in the banks, too, as I said. But the Post Office Savings Bank is there purely to receive the public’s savings, and it is there for the convenience of the public. The hon. member is very concerned at the Post Office supposedly wanting to encroach on what is really the province of the banks and he says that we are not laying down for the Post Office Savings Bank those requirements the banks have to meet; and then in the same breach the hon. member for Orange Grove asks the hon. the Minister to institute an immediate investigation so as to determine whether they cannot have the giro-system. And now? Now he wants to squeeze the private banks out of existence. Sir, that is not the main task of the Post Office Savings Bank. I want to tell the hon. member that the department is fully informed about what is going on abroad. He need not concern himself; he can go and ask them at any time about the giro-system; they will be able to tell him everything. I think it is presumptuous to want to try and drag that system in here. It is not at all applicable here nor do I think it is necessary to introduce it. When the time comes when it does become necessary, this Government will go into the matter.

In conclusion, Sir, I just want to mention one minor point. I am very grateful for the fact that the hon. the Minister has introduced this legislation now. It is going to enable our Post Office to utilize our manpower in the Post Office economically in a way in which all the work can be done productively for the Post Office as such, because in any undertaking where one acts as an agent, it is in the nature of things that one does not get the same results from one’s staff on an agency basis as one would when the concern is being managed for one’s own benefit. The Post Office Savings Bank can now be managed more efficiently, since the Post Office will no longer act as agent for the Treasury. I want to make a plea for the Post Office to go out of its way to cultivate thrift in our people, particularly in the youth. I think it is a good thing to start in our schools and encourage our school children to save. The Post Office Savings Bank is particularly suited to this purpose because one can invest small amounts in it. I think that we in South Africa do not do enough to encourage our people to save. If we could start with our schools, then we could to a very large extent influence our parents, too, to save more. I do not doubt for a moment that this amount in the savings bank will grow. It will not grow fantastically, but I believe that the amount will in fact grow substantially, and the invisible benefit which we will derive from this is that our people in South Africa will spend less on unnecessary goods and will save more and will be able to use that money more productively at a later stage.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased this measure has received the anticipated support, which is probably no more than the just due of so positive and well-intentioned a measure. It is true, as the hon. member for Orange Grove has indicated, that this will offer us a source of new capital, and whereas the hon. member asks for a fresh vision on our part, arising from the establishment of this new source, I just want to tell the hon. member that our vision is merely a continuation of the development work in which we are engaged at present. This source we have will enable the Post Office to carry out those developments only with greater success. It is true that it will help to promote thrift. In fact, this was actually the most important consideration for the Treasury when it agreed to transfer the Post Office Savings Bank, because the Treasury took the view that if the Post Office savings service were to be placed under the care of the Post Office and one were to have the active interest of postmasters and other members of the staff of the Post Office, a great deal more could be done to promote thrift. I do not doubt that we shall in fact find a new enthusiasm amongst postmasters and other officials in the Post office who will promote the cultivation of thrift at schools and all other possible places, and this can only be to the benefit of our thrift in general.

The hon. speakers of the Opposition were concerned about the guarantee to the public.

The liquidity.

Yes, but the hon. member for Orange Grove spoke about the guarantee. He was concerned about the guarantee we provide. That we really need not worry about. In the past the State guaranteed the moneys. Now the Post Office is taking it over, and the Post Office, with assets of R750 million, is now the guarantee that this money will be properly covered. But the hon. member for Constantia was particularly concerned about the question of liquidity and he also put a direct question to me as to what would happen if R30 million were to be withdrawn from the Post Office, whether we would be able to pay it and if we did not have it, what we would then do. If anything so imaginary were to happen, there would be only one thing to do and that would be to go to our second line of defence, namely the Treasury itself, from which we borrow every year. Every year the Post Office borrows R46,5 million from it for its development, and in such a case the Treasury would simply be asked to help. So there is no practical problem here.

[Inaudible.]

We have the fullest right to borrow, and the borrowing rights we have continue to exist in their fullest extent. The question of interest rates was also raised, but I think the fact that the hon. the Minister of Finance must approve interest rates, will definitely serve as an assurance that the interest rates will remain very reasonable.

Then the hon. member for Orange Grove referred to the giro-system. Interestingly enough, in Holland the giro-system is called the “postjekstelsel”, which is really quite a descriptive term. It is a system with many advantages, and the Government has been giving the matter its attention for some time. About five years ago, in fact, we appointed a commission on this and it went overseas and brought out a report. We are therefore informed about the situation.

I hope the report was favourable.

Yes, and shortly you will hear something even more favourable. The Post Office lends itself particularly well to this system, this “post cheque system”. We, with our 1 700 post offices in the country, are pre-eminently the body with the machinery to practise this system. The Government is at present engaged in giving serious attention to the introduction of this giro-system. The hon. member for Orange Grove referred to Holland which has 20% of its money liquid. If we were to introduce the giro-system here, the Post Office would have to ensure that a larger percentage of its money were liquid. It would be a logical outcome that we would have to have more liquid money in order to be able to pay in all cases.

I think that these are the most important matters which have been raised here. I thank hon. members once again for their support for this measure. I really think, Mr. Speaker, that with this measure we are taking a very important step today. It is not a risky step; I think it is a step in the interests of our Post Office development and the services we have to supply. At the same time it will contribute towards promoting thrift among our people.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage

Clause 13:

Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment—

In line 4, page 13, to omit “not be transferable” and to substitute “only be transferable in accordance with regulations”.

In explanation of this amendment I want to say that we have gone into this matter and it appears that it is not feasible to prohibit the transferability of a National Savings Certificate. In the case of deceased estates, for example, it is in fact necessary for such a certificate to be transferred to a beneficiary. Therefore it appears to be necessary to amend the Bill so as to provide by regulation under what circumstances a National Savings Certificate may be transferred.

Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to this amendment. It is in fact an improvement.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with an amendment.

Report Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The Water Research Commission established in terms of the Water Research Act of 1971 started to carry out its functions, i.e. the co-ordination and promotion of research in regard to the occurrence and utilization of water for agricultural, industrial and urban purposes, almost immediately after the promulgation of the Act. Some problems have been experienced with the practical application of the Act and it is therefore necessary for these to be rectified by introducing amendments.

Clause 1:

Section 1 of the Act is being amended by the substitution of the definition of the financial year of the commission. The financial year extended from the beginning of April of each year until the end of March in the succeeding year, and is now being amended to extend from the beginning of January until the end of December of each year. This amendment will enable the commission to submit to the Minister of Water Affairs its annual report, together with the balance sheet, as certified by the Controller and Auditor-General, before the Vote of the Minister is dealt with in the ensuing session of the House of Assembly. The necessary consultation has already been conducted with the Controller and Auditor-General.

Clause 2:

Research projects carried out by other parties financed by the Water Research Commission, as laid down in section (31) (c) of the Act, sometimes require that land be purchased for the establishment by contractors of experimental facilities or pilot plants. It is desirable for such immovable property to be registered in the name of the commission, and for that reason this amendment is being proposed.

Clause 3:

The executive officer of the Water Research Commissions i.e. the vice-chairman, is the person who has to conduct negotiations with the heads of Government departments, semi-State institutions, such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and the Atomic Energy Board, universities, local authorities and mining and agricultural organizations. The experience of the C.S.I.R. and the Atomic Energy Board has shown that it is the most effective managerial arrangement if the executive officer is also able to act as chairman. Consequently the Water Research Commission recommended that the executive officer shall also be the chairman. In any case, the Minister appoints the chairman, who is then also able to act as the executive officer of the commission. In order to maintain the necessary liaison between the Department of Water Affairs and the commission, the secretary for Water Affairs remains an ex officio member of the commission.

Clause 4:

The Water Research Commission is a statutory body, but in terms of the Act under which the commission was established, it has no power to appoint and to control its own staff. In the two years of its existence the commission found that in spite of all the goodwill and co-operation shown to it by the Department of Water Affairs and the Public Service Commission, its functions had been impeded because it had no power to appoint and manager its own staff. Owing to the complex and highly specialized nature of its functions, i.e. the co-ordination and promotion of water research, it is necessary that it be in a position to recruit and to retain the required expert and specialized staff with the necessary personal qualities, skills and qualifications. Pliancy of action and independent decision-making are required for this. Owing to the specific specialized nature of the functions of this staff, they will not easily be considered for promotion in Government departments.

Owing to the fact that the commission does not at present carry out its own research, its expert staff will naturally be limited in scope and there is no real danger of the staff structure becoming large and clumsy. Therefore, in order to ensure that the commission is able to perform its work programme to best effect and in this way comply with the instructions of the Minister, it is being proposed that the commission itself will appoint the officers and employees whom it considers necessary for the performance of its functions at the renumeration and under the other conditions of service which the Minister of Water Affairs determines in consultation with the Minister of Finance.

Clause 5:

It is being proposed that, since the commission, with the approval of the Minister, is fully responsible for all expenditure from the Water Research Fund, the Act is being amended to transfer to the commission the administration of the funds which, up to now has been carried out for the commission by the Department of Water Affairs. The Secretary for Water Affairs will, however, continue to collect taxes and levies, and transfer these moneys to the commission every month.

Mr. Speaker, may I say at once that we on this side of the House are supporting this measure. It is an amendment of a Statute which has created a statutory body which possibly, as time goes on, will be shown to be one of the most important statutory bodies ever created by this Parliament. I refer to the Water Research Commission. As we know, in perhaps only a few years’ time water in this country will be even more valuable than gold. Water is a renewable source only as long as we do not pollute it or allow a situation to develop where we have the water, but where it is unsuitable and not available for the human inhabitants of this globe. Perhaps it could even be unsuitable for any other purpose associated with human activities, because we have defiled and polluted it to such an extent that while we have the water it is not usable. This institute is therefore being called upon in its research work to provide a most valuable service so far as our water supplies are concerned. This Bill before us reconstitutes that commission. There are certain provisions of an administrative character in regard to its right to hold property, and so on. Its constitution has also been changed and is made more workable. In our opinion it is facing a difficulty, which this Bill sets out to rectify in clause 4, and which we believe is in fact the basic difficulty that a research institute will always have. This difficulty is that we have a limited number of scientists of the calibre and quality necessary to do the kind of work which is demanded if an institute of this kind is going to discharge satisfactorily the onus and obligations which have been laid upon it, viz. to see that our water supplies are properly protected and that adequate research is done so that even if it comes to a case of us re-using and re-cycling water, which may well be the case on a vast scale here in South Africa, we will have this research institute of scientists to continually help and guide us and to protect our water supplies.

The Minister is in the position where he would like certain scientists to be engaged with the institute, and yet he has to meet the provisions and requirements of the Public Service Act and the desires of the Public Service Commission. I want to say at once that we on this side of the House are entirely at one with the Minister when he feels that he can now, with the approval of the hon. the Minister of Finance, go outside the rules and regulations and the provisions of the Public Service Act if he is going to get scientists of the calibre which are absolutely necessary if the work of the institute is to be properly carried on. Indeed, I want to go further. I do not want to digress, because I know that if I do you will pull me up, Sir, but I believe that in the case of other State departments too, where scientists are necessary for the proper working of scientific research, the Public Service Act is out of date and is no longer adequate to meet modern conditions under which we are living at the present time in South Africa. The scientists as a group are such rare birds that when it is possible to get one in the hand, let us forget that there are thousands in the bush. Let us put this Minister in the position where, if he can get the approval of the hon. the Minister of Finance and has the money, he can acquire that rare bird in the interests of all of us. Finding a high-priced scientist is almost like looking for diamonds in Eloff Street.

You get them there sometimes.

You get the odd scientist too, sometimes. It is not absolutely impossible and beyond human experience to find such rare birds, but they do not fit in within the four corners of our Public Service Act. When the Minister wants to get one of these people he is not getting a scientist who will assist him personally as an individual in some occupation in which he is engaged. He is engaging him in the interests of South Africa to do a job of work for South Africa in connection with what I have said may yet be looked upon as one of the most important statutory bodies ever created by this Parliament. In our opinion the Minister must be free to act, and act quickly. If he has to advertise and go through a whole list of people in accordance with the requirements of the Public Service Commission and he has to get recommendations from them, and then if necessary go to the Cabinet to overrule the Public Service Commission and so on, a lot of time is wasted. While that is happening, the scientists have gone. This concerns not only scientists in this particular field, but those in other fields as well. Indeed sometimes I wonder whether we should not do the same in respect of our top engineers as well. However that is by the way. As far as this matter is concerned, we are entirely with the hon. the Minister. We believe it is usually the case that, after you have contacted the right kind of scientist, speed in fixing up a contract with him, getting him on the job and enrolling him in your service is one of the first elements that must be complied with. If you can find a scientist, catch him quickly. The hon. the Minister can deal with the hon. the Minister of Finance without any difficulty. We believe that in this way we are going to add immeasurably to the effective and efficient functioning of the body we created when we set up this institute. The hon. the Minister should from now on be put in the position, as I have said, where he can get any scientist who is available and add him to his staff.

Before I sit down, I wish to thank the hon. the Minister and his staff for the way in which they have always explained these Bills to us. They have got us over many of the difficulties we have encountered. I am only a poor farmer from the backveld. Sir, as you know, and I do not understand these legal instruments very readily. Accordingly I have to go to the hon. the Minister and his staff from time to time to learn the exact meaning of the provisions that are put before us. They have always helped me and the members of the group on this side immensely, and I thank them for it.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for South Coast for supporting this Bill. I believe that the hon. gentleman has now sat down for the last time after delivering a speech in the House of Assembly. The hon. gentleman came to Parliament in 1948 and since then he dedicated himself to the cause of water research, water conservation, forestry affairs and in general to the cause of our natural resources and their protection in South Africa. We have learned to know this gentleman as a dedicated person who always spoke in this House from great experience and with great authority. May I say, Mr. Speaker, that I think we are all agreed that we regret to see the hon. gentleman go. We wish him the best of luck for the years to come in Natal and we wish to thank him for the way in which he has served South Africa. As Minister of Forestry and of Water Affairs, I can say that we always found the hon. member a real gentleman in all our dealings with him. We always had the feeling that the hon. gentleman was a champion of the cause he stood for. I think he can look back on a career in Parliament of which he can be proud. We all wish him well. We thank him for his co-operation in the past and for the way in which he has always assisted me, my predecessors and the departments with which he has had to deal. I extend to him our very best wishes and, when we come back again, I think we all will miss the hon. gentleman in this House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage taken without debate.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Chairman, in the course of the Second Reading debate, I raised the question of lift clubs for schoolgoing children, which are not covered by the provision which we are now making for lift clubs for the owners of motor vehicles. We wanted to move an amendment adding the words “or his school-going child or children” after the word “person” where it appears in lines 9 and 11 of the Bill, but unfortunately this would have extended the scope of the Bill, and therefore such an amendment would have been ruled out of order at this stage. My purpose in rising, therefore, is to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister whether he will accept this principle and in the Other Place move an instruction, which would be necessary before the Committee Stage, to insert these additional words. It is a very simple amendment which would simply mean that any person who gave a lift to the child of another person in consideration of a similar conveyance of his child, would then fall under the provisions of this clause and, ipso facto, the provisions of the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Amendment Bill with which we have just dealt, and which refers to the definition in the proposed paragraph (fA) of section 1 of the Motor Carrier Transportation Act. The hon. the Deputy Minister has indicated that he is in agreement with the principle of including children and therefore I shall take the matter no further at this stage. I just want to ask him to indicate whether he is prepared to move such an amendment or to accept such an amendment in the Other Place.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Point raised this matter during the Second Reading debate on this Bill and I promised to consider the matter. I discussed this matter with the law advisers. I just want to inform the hon. member that I am able to solve his problem and accede to his request without it being necessary to amend this Bill. The existing paragraph (f) of section of the Motor Carrier Transportation Act provides for the conveyance of persons or goods on a reciprocal basis by means of a vehicle belonging to the relevant conveyer. In other words, the person conveying such person or goods on a reciprocal basis has to be the owner of the vehicle undertaking the conveyance. A further qualification is that such conveyance may not constitute motor carrier transportation. The conveyance of school children between their place of residence and the school they attend has already been excluded under paragraph (j) of section 1 of the motor Carrier Transportation Act and such conveyance consequently does not constitute motor carrier transportation. According to the explanation above, schoolchildren are, therefore, allowed to be conveyed in terms of the existing paragraph (f) of section 1 of the Motor Carrier Transportation Act. The qualifying factors are that the vehicle has to be the property of the conveyor, that the conveyance has to take place on a reciprocal basis and that the conveyance may not constitute motor carrier transportation. I think this solves the problem of the hon. member in this regard. The hon. member will agree with me that such reciprocal conveyance should continue to be associated with the owner of a specific vehicle, otherwise endless problems would be created which would merely serve to stimulate illegal conveyance. I hope the hon. member accepts this explanation and the fact that the necessity for an amendment to this legislation, therefore, falls away.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the hon. the Deputy Minister for his explanation.. May I just put this question to him: “Could he tell me whether the position is also covered by the provisions of the compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act?” I put this question because the provisions of the Bill we have just dealt with, i.e. the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Amendment Bill, specifically refers to paragraph (f) of (fA) of the Motor Carrier Transportation Act. I merely want to obtain certainty that the children who are so conveyed will be covered by the provisions of the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Insurance Act.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is the case. The position is also covered by the Motor Vehicle Insurance Act and there will be no problem whatsoever in this connection. I wish to assure the hon. member that this is also the case as far as children are concerned.

Clause agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Chairman, clause 6 deals inter alia with the deletion of paragraph 39 and the substitution of an entirely new set of paragraphs. Paragraph 39 reads—

I believe that that is commonly referred to as the omnibus clause. This particular aspect is now being dealt with specifically under the new paragraphs 39, 40 and 41, and while I would not at any stage question the need and the desirability of having these powers and these particular paragraphs, there are certain aspects which I should like to ask the hon. the Deputy Minister to clarify. The new paragraph 39 deals with the prescribing of the classes of ships, etc., and I am not particularly concerned with that; I am more concerned at the moment with the new paragraph 40, which reads—

Sir, I have some problems here and these are mainly concerned with the question of medicines which are intended for the prevention and treatment of disease. My first problem is that as I see the position, ships will, according to prescribed terms, have to carry some sort of medicines box in which are listed certain preparations for use under such emergencies. I visualize the position that a ship going to another part of the world might very well find it necessary to replenish supplies of certain medicines, and this is where my difficulty begins, because the Drugs Control Act, Act No. 101 of 1965, lays down very strict provisions regarding the registration of medicines, and, as I see it, medicines which might be quite legitimately purchased to replenish the ship’s medical stores in another country, could not be brought ashore into South Africa because the Drugs Control Council has laid down that they cannot be brought into South Africa unless they are registered. Sir, let me give you an example of the difficulty that this actually entails. Recently a case was brought to my notice in Durban where a man was on an American ship and the agents of the ship had telegraphed for a supply of vitamin B complex injections to be sent out from America for this particular man to receive when he arrived in Durban on his ship. When the drug arrived—a perfectly harmless non-scheduled drug—it was impounded by Customs; it could not be released because it was not regarded as a drug which was registered under Act No. 101 of 1965. It was only by the sympathetic intervention of the regional medical director in Durban that this man was able to get his medicine. Sir, I believe that there are other cases where people in innocence import perfectly harmless medicines, and they are not permitted to get them through customs because they are not registered under Act 101 of 1965. I draw that particular aspect to the attention of the hon. the Minister because I believe that if there is no exemption or provision made under the prescribed conditions which will flow from these regulations, there could be all sorts of difficulties.

My other problem in regard to these medicines is, and, I think everyone will agree, that nowadays most medicines are under schedule. There are various schedules which control their sale and use to a large extent. Many of them are subject to prescription only, while some can only be supplied only by people legally entitled to supply them. As I understand the Medical, Dental and Pharmacy act, there are roughly 16 classes of people who are entitled under the Act to supply certain medicines. Now, if it is necessary for certain life-giving medicines to prevent disease or to treat disease—and I am thinking in terms of antibiotics and pain-relieving drugs—what will the position be under these particular paragraphs? Because I take it that many of them will be scheduled medicines subject to strict control. I ask the hon. the Deputy Minister, if possible, to indicate what is intended when it is said that the medicines should be of a prescribed class subject to such exemption as may be prescribed. This is in paragraph 40.

Before the hon. the Deputy Minister replies, I wonder whether he could also tell us what medical staff he has in the department with the necessary experience and medical training to draw up this schedule of medicines which may be prescribed, and if there are no such persons available, who will be responsible for the drawing up of that schedule.

I must admit immediately that the hon. member who spoke first has more knowledge of drugs and the legislation concerning drugs than I have. I am speaking of the Drugs Control Act. I accept at once that his knowledge of this matter is superior to mine, and this being so, we took certain precautions prior to bringing this measure before this House. I approached certain interested parties so as to inquire how they felt in this regard. Now, the two clauses must be read together. The hon. member would have noticed that we have another one, an earlier clause, in terms of which ships of under 100 registered tons are also being brought in under this legislation to comply with these specific requirements. I took the trouble of asking my department to gather information. Among others they contacted the S.A. Railways and Harbours Administration and the Society of Master Mariners of South Africa and their reply on this was—

We asked people such as the S.A. Marine Corporation Limited and they had no objections, and neither did Thesen’s Steamship Company, Unicorn Shipping Lines, the South African Shipowners’ Association, the South African Railways, etc. I foresee no problems arising from the fact that we are now also bringing smaller ships in under this category, with appliances which will have to be obtained in overseas harbours. I believe that organizations such as those I have mentioned and which are fully conversant with the international situation and move internationally in any event, will obtain the necessary medicines and carry an adequate supply on board of their ships. Therefore I do not forsee any problem in this. I shall, however, bear the hon. member’s remarks in mind and on a later occasion, in the Other Place, I shall look into the matter if there seems to be any problems. Unfortunately we must take the progress of the business of this hon. House into consideration and if I am unable to bring this matter back to this House, I shall inform the hon. member about the problem personally.

In reply to the question of the hon. member for Durban Point, I have to say that in this regard we naturally co-operate very closely with the Department of Health and their official advises us on this matter.

I would like to thank the Deputy Minister for his courtesy and his undertaking to advise me in due course after he has investigated this matter. May I suggest that if he experiences difficulty, it might be necessary for him to recommend some amendment which would help to overcome this difficulty, not just in so far as this clause is concerned, but also in so far as other visitors to South Africa are concerned.

Clause agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move, subject to Standing Order No. 49—

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the Bill at this stage for two reasons. The first is to prove to this House that I can support a good Bill dealing with the subdivision of agricultural land quietly and without rancour or violence. The second reason is to point out to this House that our main reason for objecting to this Bill in August 1970, when it was introduced, was in fact that it contained loopholes as a result of the fact that leases were not provided for. We are indeed grateful that the Minister has at last seen the light, that he agrees with the Opposition and that he has now introduced this amendment.

He was quite quick; it was only four years ago when we pointed this out to him.

Mr. Speaker, we also warned at that stage that there was the possibility of another loophole regarding the formation of companies. I do not see that this Bill clearly provides for this. I strongly suspect that the Minister will in due course find that further amendments will have to be introduced in this connection.

I should also like to ask—because this is the last stage at which I can deal with this matter—whether the amendments now being brought about will not perhaps affect the people who have holiday houses which they lease on State land. Along our coastal resorts there are numerous places where one can hire a site from the State. These will in fact be subdivisions as they are nearly all on long-term leases. I should like the hon. the Minister to clarify the position in this regard and tell us whether such properties will be exempted from the provisions of this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Albany for the attitude adopted by that side of the House. I have told the hon. member before that I regard him as a decent United Party man. He approaches these matters in a positive way. The hon. member for Green Point remarked, by way of interjection, that it took us four years to introduce this amendment. All I can say is that we learn from practical experience what problems may arise. I have here an advertisement I should like to read out to hon. members. It reads as follows—

I have here a diagram of a farm which has been subdivided, without any sanction from a land surveyor, into tiny plots on which Macadamia nuts are cultivated. This is truly a heartbreaking story; it was a deception which is being practised here. That is why I am so grateful to the Opposition for helping us to put a stop to this exploitation of city dwellers who would like to have a piece of land.

†The hon. member asked me about holiday homes. All contracts shorter than 9 years and 11 months are not affected. I cannot think at the moment of any such leases which continue for longer than 9 years and 11 months. If the period of the contract is longer than 10 years or if, after the period of 9 years and 11 months, there is an option, then it should be registered. Such cases will then come before the Minister. In practice, however, I do not think we shall find any holiday homes being leased for periods longer than 10 years.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move, subject to Standing Order No. 49—

Mr. Speaker, we have been supporting this measure all along, but clause 5 of the Bill worries us on this side of the House. Clause 5 provides for the exclusion of certain areas, Bantu areas, urban areas, areas where our Coloureds live. In these particular areas we have some of the most serious erosion problems in the country. This is a problem which has caused us concern for many years but apparently this will have to be left to other bodies to solve. I do not want to say much on the Third Reading, save for the fact that what worries me too is that when one looks at the General Laws Amendment Bill, two clauses which concern this Bill have been inserted in that Bill. They seem to have been tucked away in the General Laws Amendment Bill and I feel that it would have been much better if they had been inserted in this the Soil Conservation Amendment Bill. I wonder if the hon. the Deputy Minister could give us an explanation for this.

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful that the hon. the Opposition supported this Bill. In essence this is an updating of the old Act. Every one of these clauses has been inserted to facilitate the operation and the administration of the principal Act. Clause 5 concerns the extension of certain powers to local authorities. The majority of these cases we find in the Transvaal, where farming operations are carried out within the area of a local authority. At present such land is excluded from the provisions of the principal Act. The farms in this area are excluded from the benefits provided to farmers under the Soil Conservation Act. This clause is therefore being inserted so that arrangements can be made with the Administrators and local authorities for farmers, whose land is situated within the jurisdiction of local authorities, to share in these benefits, which is not the case under the existing Act.

As far as the Bantu areas are concerned, hon. members are aware of the fact—it seems to me as if this is where we differ fundamentally—that these powers have already been transferred to other departments. This is a function that has to be performed by them. In this regard we are prepared to render assistance. As a matter of fact, there are already officials in that department who are performing this function. As a matter of fact, we as two parties differ from one another on this aspect, and I think this is one of the issues out of which we shall be able to make some political capital for some time to come. Of course, we regard the Bantu areas as entities on their own, while the United Party wants to see them as a whole. We will probably continue to differ on this score for the foreseeable future. This arrangement in respect of soil conservation, which is of such great importance to all of us, is being carried out to our satisfaction. This measure is in fact applicable in those areas belonging to the Bantu Trust.

The inclusion of two clauses in the General Law Amendment Bill is something for which I should like to apologise. There are no ulterior motives here, and these two clauses are merely being duplicated. For that reason they will probably fall away. I hope the hon. member is satisfied with my explanation.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act came into operation recently and it would appear that the new principles contained in it are giving general satisfaction. One is grateful to be able to say this. However, in the practical application of the legislation it has come to light that there are a few further adjustments which may be made to good effect and in the interests of the mineworker, while a few bona fide errors have been discovered which may be corrected at the same time.

The few adjustments and corrections that are being made in the Bill are of a relatively simple nature and I think the easiest would be for me to explain the proposed adjustments briefly, clause by clause.

Clause 1:

What we want to do here is to amend paragraph (f) of the definition of “compensatable disease”. The object of the amendment is to enable the Minister of Mines to declare scleroderma to be a compensatable disease. At this stage I want to say, however, that after further negotiations with all the interested parties—the Chamber of Mines, the Certification Committee and others—I intend to move an amendment to the wording of clause 1 of the Bill during the Committee Stage. In the meantime, however, I deem it necessary to motivate as fully as I can the proposed declaration of this disease to be a compensatable disease, so that there may be no misunderstanding in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, it has been said repeatedly in this House that the fact that quite a number of mineworkers contract this very unpleasant skin disease known as scleroderma is a source of concern to the Government. An epidemiological study was accordingly undertaken several years ago to try to determine whether this disease was more prevalent among mineworkers than among the general public. This investigation required the examination of many thousands of records, and the preliminary figures which were supplied the year before last revealed the following number of cases of scleroderma in the various control groups:

Non-mining population

From a total of 89 263 cases which fell under the Sick Fund of the S.A. Railways and Harbours, only three cases of scleroderma were discovered, while among the records of 20 000 people who received a military pension not a single case of scleroderma was found.

The general public

An investigation conducted at the Johannesburg General Hospital in respect of inpatients for the period January 1970 to October 1971 brought to light 10 people suffering from scleroderma, of whom six were mineworkers. Two of the remaining four were exposed to dust in their occupations. At the Periphery Vascular Clinic 22 cases of scleroderma were found in a total of 6 000 files. In 16 of these 22 cases the occupations were noted down, and it appeared that half of them, i.e. eight out of the 16, were mineworkers.

Mining population

The records of 33 917 people at the Mining Aid Association were examined and it was found that 27 male workers above the age of 19 years had contracted scleroderma. At the National Research Institute for Occupational Diseases a total of 7 400 postmortems revealed 12 cases of this disease, while at the Medical Bureau 62 cases came to light between 1953 and the beginning of 1972.

I want to concede at once that it has not yet been possible anywhere in the world to determine the exact causes of scleroderma. We are conducting thoroughgoing research, but we do not know when the answer as to the cause of this unfortunate disease will be found. Nevertheless, I think that hon. members will agree with me that the figures I have quoted have given rise to a strong surmise, in South Africa at any rate, that scleroderma occurs more frequently among mine-workers than among the general public and that the time has therefore come for us to do something tangible towards assisting mineworkers who have contracted this disease.

May I say that in regard to mining legislation and compensatable diseases as such—I say this in all modesty, but it is a fact—South Africa has attained the position of world leader. We must remain in that position, and for that reason I think it is very wise, and I am very happy, that it has been made possible for us, with the co-operation of all the parties concerned to come to the stage this afternoon where scleroderma can in fact be declared to be a compensatable disease. Therefore I want to avail myself of this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to all the parties concerned, including the Chamber of Mines, the Certification Committee and my department, for having made this possible.

†I have no doubt that the hon. member for Rosettenville, who, as a medical man for whom I have the highest regard, has specialized knowledge of these matters will be able to confirm that this is a serious illness which causes very serious disability. I understand that in many cases it is a permanent condition and that it can even be the cause of death.

*I want to point out, too, that according to our estimates there are only about 50 mineworkers living who would qualify for compensation if scleroderma were declared to be a compensatable disease under the Act. It will therefore be clear to hon. members that such a step will not impose any additional financial burden worth mentioning on the mining industry.

†Clause 2 of the Bill merely contains a rectification in so far as reference to a certain section is concerned, and I therefore turn to clause 3.

Clause 3:

With regard to the latter clause, it is the position that the obligations in respect of the keeping of records, medical examinations, etc. which are applicable to the owners of controlled mines and controlled works, are also applied by various sections of the Act to contractors who perform work on behalf of such owners. Provision has been made in section 38(2) for the making of regulations in regard to, inter alia, the medical examination of Bantu persons and in connection with the repatriation or return of Bantu recruited by the owner of a controlled mine or controlled works or by any organization acting for any such owner. Due to an oversight, para. (1) of section 38(2) does not contain a reference to a contractor and the matter is consequently now being rectified.

Clause 4:

Section 63 of the Act compels owners of controlled mines to pay such amounts for purposes of research as the Minister may determine. The amounts which have been determined in respect of asbestos mines for this purpose are one cent per shift in the case of White persons and one-half cent per shift in the case of non-Whites. These are, in fact, the maximum amounts permissible under subsection (2), but an agreement between the Government and the asbestos mines has been in existence since 1964 in terms of which research in connection with asbestosis, etc., is financed by the State and the asbestos mines on a rand-for-rand basis. It now appears that the maximum amounts which may be levied under section 63(2) are too low to cover the research expenditure for which these mines are liable, which expenditure is of the order of about R60 000 per year. It is not considered advisable to provide for increased payments by the asbestos mines by way of an extra-statutory agreement, and the maximum levies prescribed by subsection (2) are therefore increased as indicated in the Bill in order to cover the annual amount which the asbestos mines have undertaken to contribute towards research in connection with asbestosis. There is at present no intention to increase the research payments determined in respect of other mines, and I may add that they are at present not even being called upon to contribute the maximum amounts which could be levied under the existing provisions of the Act.

Clause 5:

Section 74 of the Act makes provision for the payment of certain moneys from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for mines and works. Under the previous legislation, it had always been the position that if a person had been found to suffer from a compensatable disease contracted at a mine which had ceased operations before it could be declared a controlled mine, the State accepted responsibility for the benefits which became payable to that person because there was no mine owner from whom the compensation could be claimed. When an existing mine or works is declared a controlled mine or works, the owner must assume responsibility in respect of damage caused by his mine or works to the health of persons before that mine or works had been subjected to control.

Section 74(e) of the 1973 Act has been worded in such a way that the State assumed responsibility for the payment of compensation in respect of all service at a mine or works prior to the date on which that mine or works was declared a controlled mine. In practice, this would mean that the State assumed considerable financial burdens, especially with regard to works, for which it was not previously liable. This was never the intention and clause 5 of the Bill therefore merely restores the position to what it was under the previous legislation. This was the intention of both sides of the House when the new Act was framed.

*Clause 6:

The amendments introduced into section 79 of the Act by clause 6 really amount to the insertion of an important principle into the Act. As hon. members will remember, the Act grants beneficiaries who have been certified to be impaired by 20% to 50% the right to apply to have their pensions converted into a one-sum payment. However, this provision does not apply to pensioners certified to be impaired by more than 50%, and representations have been received from various persons and bodies to the effect that we should extend this choice of conversion of pensions into one-sum payments to these pensioners, i.e. those certified to be impaired by more than 50%. This is also being done because individual cases have come to our notice where it was obvious that if those certified to be impaired by more than 50% did not receive this benefit they would be adversely affected. I have been personally approached by several beneficiaries in this group, and I have not the slightest doubt that there are very deserving cases among them, few cases, but very deserving ones. In this way, for example, some persons were certified above 50% for the first time shortly before the commencement of the 1973 Act. At the commencement of the Act, therefore, they had not yet received a pension, or had received only a small amount. In such cases and in the case of other persons who are still relatively young they would derive greater benefit from receiving the substantial cash payment. Of course, the circumstances vary from one person to another. Even in the case of an older person a cash payment may be of greater benefit to him, because circumstances may indicate that he is unlikely ever to receive the amount of R18 000 by way of a pension during his lifetime.

After careful consideration and after the necessary consultation with all the parties concerned, the Government is satisfied that there is sufficient justification for extending the right to apply for the conversion of pensions into one-sum benefits to pensioners certified to be impaired by more than 50%, and clause 6 consequently makes the necessary provision for this.

According to all expectations only a small percentage of these people will apply for conversion, but I still want to point out that the discretion for approving or refusing applications for conversion into a one-sum payment rests with the Compensation Commissioner for Occupational Diseases, who acts in consultation with the Advisory Committee. Therefore, when it is obviously not to the advantage of the pensioner concerned and of his dependants to relinquish his pension in favour of a one-sum payment, this application cannot be favourably considered and granted. When conversion is in fact granted, the difference between R18 000 and the total amount already paid in pensions is payable, with this proviso, however, that when the difference is less than R9 000 the amount of R9 000 shall be paid out.

Clause 7:

Under the new dispensation, when a person is found to be suffering from a compensatable disease in the first degree, a one-sum benefit of R12 000 is awarded to him. If he later passes into the second degree, i.e. impairment of more than 40%, an additional benefit of R6 000 is awarded. If, as a result of a post-mortem examination, it is found for the first time that he was suffering from a compensatable disease, the amount of R12 000 or R18 000, depending on a finding of first degree or second degree, is awarded to his widow.

However, there are cases where a person is found to be suffering from a compensatable disease while still living. In that case he receives R12 000. It sometimes happens, however, that when such a person dies it is found at a post-mortem examination that he was actually suffering from a compensatable disease in the second degree. In that case an additional amount of R6 000 must therefore be paid to his widow. In the existing Act, however, no provision is made for the payment of this additional benefit to the widow, so the Act is now being worded in such a way as to make the position quite clear.

This position is therefore being rectified by clause 7, which amends section 82 of the Act.

Clause 8:

Clause 8 is a consequential amendment to bring the position of the Coloured man or Coloured woman who received a one-sum benefit in respect of a compensatable disease in the first degree and who is found after a post-mortem examination to have been suffering from a compensatable disease in the second degree into line with that of the White person, as I have just explained it to you under clause 7; that is to say, this clause provides for the payment in such a case of an additional benefit for the second degree.

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, this Bill deals for the most part with a number of corrections, together with these two important aspects which are now being included here, i.e. the declaration of scleroderma to be a compensatable disease and the extension of the privilege of being able to receive a one-sum benefit to those people certified to be impaired by more than 50%, while the Bill also introduces a few adjustments in the interests of the mineworkers. By this I have now covered the whole position.

Mr. Speaker, this is a most important Bill, most important to the mineworkers particularly, but it also affects to some extent the future of people in a large number of other occupations. The hon. the Minister has given us a very clear exposition of the contents of this Bill and we on this side of the House have much pleasure in supporting it.

I want to say that the anomalies that have come to light since the passing of the principal Act during the last session of Parliament, up to the present, have also come to my notice, and I am pleased that the hon. the Minister has found it possible to clear up these anomalies. This is particularly so in regard to people who fall into the 50%-plus group. Suffering from pneumoconiosis. They have had what I have always considered to be a legitimate grievance in that they did not have the option of choosing between a lump sum benefit and a standing pension. This position will now however be rectified. We may perhaps find other difficulties arising at a later stage in regard to pensions and so forth, and I hope that they will be dealt with in the same manner as these present ones have been dealt with by the hon. the Minister.

In regard to the inclusion of scleroderma as a compensatable disease, let me say that this is very important indeed. It is not only that the disease in itself is important, but in terms of the amendment in clause 1, it does as from the present, open up the possibility of the inclusion of many other diseases which could be attributed to the work that is done on the surface or underground by miners. There is, as I say, the possibility that these diseases will be included among those diseases which at the moment are being compensated for by the authorities. Scleroderma is fortunately a very rare disease. The Minister has pointed out that it is very rare, and I must say that in the 30 odd years that I have looked after mineworkers, I have come across only one case. He happened to be a very, very close friend of mine. He subsequently died from the disease. The disease in his case affected both his skin and his lungs. He died an unhappy death. There was no provision for compensation in those days. If such a case should arise today, the man concerned would receive compensation. But what are we going to do when we find that other diseases will have to be included as diseases in respect of which compensation must be paid under the global term “compensation for occupational diseases”?

Sir, I am pleased that the hon. the Leader of the House is now here; I am sorry that he is going to leave us soon, and I wish him well in his retirement.

The time will come when we will have to think whether we are dealing with this type of legislation in the right department. For instance, one man may get pneumoconiosis while working in a mine, and another man may get pneumoconiosis while working in a quarry. I do not see any difference between the two cases. That man should receive the same compensation, irrespective of where he was working when he contracted the disease. The same could apply to scleroderma and to asbestosis. A man may get asbestosis while working in an asbestos mine, but he can also get it in a factory dealing with asbestos products.

They do.

The hon. member for South Coast says they do get it. How can we distinguish the one from the other and say that the one shall be compensated by the Department of Mines and that the other shall be compensated under the Workmen’s Compensation Act? We are dealing here with the principle of compensation for workers. Sir, we have to give this careful thought. Without wishing to prolong the discussion, I feel that an investigation should be instituted. It could be instituted by members of the House but perhaps it would be better if we had this investigation done by both representatives of this House and of the various departments which are already paying compensation for disease and accident. I feel that the Department of Health should take over the responsibility for diseases which affect people whether they work in mines, in factories or in any other place. The Department of Mines should shed itself of those responsibilities. There is a difficulty in that the Chamber of Mines makes a contribution towards the compensation, but we must try to overcome that difficulty. In the same way I feel that the Department of Labour should not be responsible for compensating a man if he loses a leg in an accident while working. It should be done by the Department of Health. We should have a division of occupational disease under the Department of Health. Our industries are growing at a remarkable rate and many new innovations are being introduced and many new types of metals and minerals and substances are used in industry today, many of which are produced in the mines. The mines take out the substances, but they are used by industry, and we find today that the man who takes out these substances from the earth, is treated altogether differently from the man who is using that substance in a factory. I think the time must come soon that we should investigate the possibility of instituting a new division of occupational health. If we do that we will be able to overcome a lot of the difficulties and anomalies which exist at the moment.

Finally, I want to say to the hon. the Minister that we on this side of the House will help him if he wishes to proceed on the lines I have suggested. In the meantime we are pleased that scleroderma has been included in the list of compensatable diseases, but there is only one question which I cannot answer at the moment. How is the Minister going to compensate? It is a progressive disease; it gets worse with time. It is something like the progress made in pneumoconiosis. It stars off almost innocently and gradually develops in intensity and severity. I do not know whether the doctors associated with the department at the moment have worked out a compensation formula for this disease. If they have, I would be very pleased if the Minister could give me this in his reply and I am sure that during the next session of Parliament those of us who are going to come back here will be only too pleased to deal with these suggestions I have made.

I am grateful this afternoon that these changes are being brought about by this Bill. The Act has only been in operation a few months now, and yet it already appears there are quite a few anomalies. But this afternoon I am grateful that the Opposition, some of their members who are involved with this Act and who have worked hard on the Select Committee so that we could make a success of this Act which was introduced last year, could also contribute today towards having these changes made. I am grateful to the Minister for that concession to those persons who, before the commencement of the new Act on 1 October, were already classified at more than 50%. and that they will now also be able to claim a single amount. There are young men. I know the case of a person—I do not want to mention his name—of 42 years of age, who has been warned that he is suffering from the final stages of pneumoconiosis and tuberculosis. Unfortunately the pension is insufficient and consequently that person must go on working on the mines, where he continues to be exposed to dust. Now the Act has been amended in such a way that that young man, if he can make out a case for himself and the commissioner approves it, can obtain compensation and find himself another livelihood. We say thank you very much to the Minister. There will not be many such persons, but I am glad that those that there are also have the right, as in the other cases, to obtain compensation, and that their difficulties have now also been eliminated.

In addition I just want to agree with the hon. member for Rosettenville that sclerederma is not a disease that often occurs, but it is one of those feared diseases that one can contract. Undoubtedly, whether we want to accept it or not, it has been proved by the statistics which the Minister presented to us, that most of those cases have occurred in the mines. I am grateful today in the knowledge that those unlucky 50 persons who are suffering from this disease—I think there are about 50; there are not many more—will also come into consideration. This matter has not only come up for discussion the last few months. It has already been intensively investigated for several years, and this matter has also been discussed repeatedly with eminent doctors and scientists of our country, and we are therefore glad that this change is now being brought about. I do not know whether I can agree with the hon. member, who spoke before I did, when he says that the time has now come for the activities relating to these investigations and the certification of diseases should fall under the Department of Health. That is a matter about which a great deal can be said. There would probably be advantages and disadvantages involved, but I do not want to express an opinion about that now. That is something I want to leave in the hands of the doctors who deal with these matters.

This legislation has brought about a great breakthrough in providing for the needs of our mineworkers. If there are still other anomalies and diseases which mine-workers are exposed to and in respect of which investigations and research will be done in the future, I believe I will have the honour and the chance to support legislation which may be introduced in that connection. In fact, I believe that such legislation would be supported by both sides of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I merely want to say a few words. I also want to associate myself with those who expressed thanks to the hon. the Minister for the amendments contained in this legislation.

In connection with what the hon. members for Rosettenville and Stilfontein said, I want to make it clear that I take a definite stand in opposing the suggestion of the hon. member for Rosettenville that the activities in connection with occupational diseases amongst mineworkers should be transferred to the Department of Health. I do not have the time to speak about that now—I did not intend to take part in this discussion because I did not know that hon. member would come along with that suggestion—but I should like to have it recorded that I would adopt a definite standpoint opposing that if the proposal were implemented in any form whatsoever. A lot of water will have to flow into the sea before it will be possible to convince me I am wrong.

I want to ask the hon. the Minister to indicate whether the provisions in the Bill, which are applicable to widows, will also come into force with retrospective effect from 1 October 1974.

Mr. Speaker, I want to express my hearty thanks to the hon. member for Rosettenville and other Opposition members for the support they have promised for this Bill. I want to assure them I appreciate it very highly. This is actual proof that we all have the mineworkers’ interests at heart. I can assure you it was no easy task to have reached the point we have this afternoon, by for example, declaring sclerederma a compensatable disease. As far as I am concerned, it is a red-letter day because I am a very good friend of the mineworkers and would very much like to try and do the best in their interests. Hon. members are also aware of the years of struggle it has taken to reach the stage where last year, when the occupational diseases in Mines and Works Act was passed by the House, an Act which enabled the mineworkers to take their benefits in a single amount. It was an equally big struggle and very difficult to negotiate all the twists and turns so that this afternoon a further step could be taken enabling people with a certification figure above 50% to also obtain their benefits in a single amount. I want to thank very heartily the hon. members for Stilfontein and Carletonville for their contributions. Together with the other hon. members in our mining group, they are two fierce fighters for the interests of the mineworkers. We also express our thanks to them for that aspect.

The hon. member for Rosettenville intimated that he wondered whether it was best for the functions in connection with these compensatable diseases to be handled by the Department of Mines. He wonders whether thought cannot be given to an inquiry to determine whether this matter cannot be given wider scope to also include other industries, and whether this matter would not then belong under the Department of Health. Hon. members have already heard the hon. member for Carletonville sharply disagreeing about that aspect. The fact is that the whole question of occupational diseases in mines has an extensive background and a long history in the Republic of South Africa. There is a very elaborate system of medical bodies—for example, the certification committee, the investigation committee and some of the most famed medical professors entrusted with investigations into occupational diseases, some of whom have become world renowned—who have throughout the years thought it right that this matter belongs under the Department of Mines due to the fact that it is firstly a matter of the mine-workers’ interests. Therefore I do not think the hon. member for Rosettenville will expect me, on this occasion, to give a decision for or against his opinion. This matter is many-sided, and it must be very thoroughly investigated before one can express any authoritative opinion about it. I want to conclude by saying that this matter has a very long history. It appears to me as if a very good case would have to be made out for this before thought could be given to taking these matters away from the Department of Mines and transferring them to another department. The hon. member himself said it is a matter that could be discussed at a later opportunity. At a later opportunity we can therefore come back to this matter.

I want to say thank you very much to everyone for the fact that this Bill, which is in the interests of the mineworkers, is being approved so unanimously by hon. members of this House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Committee Stage Clause 1 negatived.

Mr. Chairman, I move—

1. 1. Section 1 of the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), is hereby amended by the insertion of the following paragraph after paragraph (e) of the definition of “compensatable disease”:

The definition I have just read to hon. members boils down to the fact that scleroderma is now being declared a compensatable disease—like pneumoconiosis, a condition compounded of pneumoconiosis and tuberculosis and the other diseases defined by the present Act as compensatable diseases. Therefore scleroderma is being added to the legislation as a compensatable disease. This wording was decided upon after very sweeping discussions between myself, my officials, the Chamber of Mines, the certification committee and the other bodies involved. There is no doubt in our minds that this is the best way we can set about things under these circumstances.

Mr. Chairman, I do not have any objection against the hon. the Minister’s amendment, but I do not think that this is the correct way to do it. I think he should at least have given the House notice that he intended to bring in an amendment. When we agreed to the Second Reading I was under the impression that no amendments will be made. I cannot understand that at this late stage, without giving any notice whatsoever either on the Order Paper or through his secretary, such an amendment could come before the House. It is quite strange that the hon. the Minister should have done this. I want to say to him that we on this side want to co-operate, but we do reserve the right to have notice of amendments which are going to be brought in. Fortunately, in this case, it is one we accept, but I must say to the hon. the Minister that if there are other amendments that he intends bringing in without giving notice prior to this, we will have great reservations about accepting them.

Mr. Chairman, I am very sorry if there is a misunderstanding in this regard. In my Second Reading speech I said that I was going to move such an amendment. I was really under the impression that my officials had informed the hon. member for Rosettenville and the other members opposite of this amendment. They told me that at least the hon. member for Jeppes was informed. If there was a misunderstanding, I am very sorry. I want to assure hon. members that there are no other amendments that I am going to propose. There is really nothing in this amendment except to declare scleroderma a compensatable disease. But if the hon. member has any doubts about our co-operation on this issue, I do not want any misunderstanding to prevail. The hon. member for Jeppes has been informed and I think the only reason why the hon. member for Rosettenville was not informed about this amendment is because he could not be contacted. I was under the impression that hon. members opposite had in fact been informed about this amendment. Lastly, I want to say, and the hon. member knows me, that if I was in any doubt that this constituted a deviation from a principle and would not be acceptable to hon. members on that side or if the wording of it would not be acceptable to the Chamber of Mines the certifying committee, or any of the bodies connected with it, I would not have asked for the Committee Stage to be taken now. I hope that any misunderstanding has now been erased.

Mr. Chairman, I for one accept the hon. the Minister’s explanation. I accept that there could possibly have been a misunderstanding between the hon. member for Jeppes and myself. Fortunately, no harm has been done in the matter and, as I said at the beginning, we will support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Rosettenville has put our attitude to the amendment. It will be possible to study the amendment if the Report Stage and Third Reading is held over. I think the hon. the Minister of Mines knows well that the safest way to give notice to the Opposition is through the Whips. If he is careful to take that course in future, there can be no misunderstanding.

New Clause 1 agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with an amendment.