Mr. Speaker, in South Africa people generally talk about a manpower shortage, and what is actually meant by that is a shortage of trained manpower in almost all sectors and at almost all levels of our society. To an ever-greater extent representations are being made to the authorities for our manpower corps in South Africa to receive better training and better schooling. One is also pleased that, in the Budget under discussion, the hon. the Minister of Finance announced that tax concessions would be granted in respect of such training for our people.

However, there is one sector of South African society where the manpower shortage has at present become so acute that in my opinion it warrants the attention of this House, and that is lower or primary education in South Africa.

A number of years back the Transvaal Education Bureau laid down that the ratio between male and female teachers in primary schools should be of the order of 40 to 60. That means that 40% should be male and 60% female teachers. Unfortunately we have found of late that the teaching profession is increasingly passing into the hands of ladies, especially in the primary schools. It has passed into the hand of the female teachers. In looking at the effects of this, one finds that something will definitley have to be done, because this tendency has gained ground so rapidly that the administrator of the Transvaal said in the provincial council earlier this year that education in the Transvaal was unmistakably becoming a female profession. In the primary schools of the Transvaal 76,5% of the teaching staff are women, and that includes both temporary and permanent staff. That means, in effect, that only 23,5% of all posts at our primary schools in the Transvaal, our White schools, are in the hands of male teachers. Natal has the same problem, and the position in the Free State and the Cape is not much better. When one takes into account that the school today actually stands for the total education of the child—i.e. supplementary to the upbringing he gets at home—and that the character-building of the child has become one of the primary and main tasks of the school—in this case the primary school in particular—the position is disturbing. The old saying that as the twig is bent the tree is inclined, is as applicable today.

In speaking about this aspect of our education and our teaching, one would not be doing justice to our female teachers if one did not pay tribute to the role the woman plays in the sphere of education in South Africa today. Just as female teachers are necessary in one’s junior primary education—in other words, to continue in junior primary education that woman-mother-child milieu created at home—so the male teacher is necessary for senior primary education, from Standards two to five. Here the male teacher must serve as the substitute identification figure and the figure of authority in the same way as the father fulfils this role at home.

Research has also proved that boys tend to have a higher failure rate if they have been taught by female teachers only. In the same way it was proved that from the time they are very small, from a very early age, girls start identifying themselves with male persons, persons for whom they have respect, persons whom they idealize. It is also a fact that if they do not find this in the father at home and if they do not find this in the male teacher at school, they, unfortunately, find it somewhere else, either in the form of a pop singer or a film star, or in a person whose character and personality are simply not very commendable.

We who live in towns and cities know that today we are living at a juncture where ever-higher demands are being made on the free time of the husband. There are various reasons why the attention he can devote to his family is getting less and less. There are after-hour meetings and extramural and after-hour studies, something which we readily encourage since we are keen to see our people improving their qualifications and thus becoming more productive. This is a tune we are familiar with. However, this results in more meetings, more research projects, more symposiums, more conferences. The teacher is therefore compelled by necessity to play a complementary role in order to supplement the role of the father figure at home. We find this deficiency at various levels. Let us mention a few of them. There are, for example, sport, recreation and culture.

If we visit the primary schools today, we can have a look to see who is coaching the children at athletics. We shall find four female teachers for every male teacher there. On the Witwatersrand the same applies to tennis and swimming, even to cricket. It is therefore not funny when people say that Ichabod is already written across our sport in South Africa, because our boys are starting to prefer soft games. It would seem as though that Ichabod, that writing on the wall, has been written there in the fine print of the school mistress. One shudders to think that if this tendency should continue, it must mean that before long we will find the school mistress, armed with a whistle, in the boxing ring as well as on the rugby and soccer fields. One may therefore ask oneself: What will the forwards of the Lions or the All Blacks do with us when they meet us on the rugby field again in five or ten years’ time? But the most important disadvantage and the most important deficiency arising from the disappearance of the man in the teaching profession, especially in the primary school teaching profession, is the lack of discipline. Sir, we who were at primary school ourselves have experience of that male teacher, that “Sir” with the heavy hand and the strong arm and the stern eye, who only had to give one look to let one know what was coming. Now, do we really want to try and rectify at high school or university level what we are neglecting to do at primary school level, or do we, as the popular saying goes today, rather want to say: “Just you wait; just wait until you are called up by the Defence Force, then they will knock discipline into you.” Sir, that is not the function of the Defence Force. That is something which must be done at home and at primary school level.

However, now one can ask this question: If there really is a manpower shortage, why drone on about it; you are not going to get men to fill the teaching posts anyway. Sir, when commerce and industry require people, they make more and more use of semi-skilled people, even of non-Whites. When we require artisans, we recruit immigrants from abroad. We can also to a certain extent, recruit professional people such as engineers, architects, quantity surveyors, etc., from abroad. We can computerize, automatize and mechanize more effectively. But when it comes to the child, it is of national importance that we take one thing into consideration, and that is that this is the young South Africa; this is the young South Africa of tomorrow. We are dealing here with the child who requires personal attention, not from just anyone, but from the sons of our father-land, from men schooled in the traditions, the modes the codes and the mores of our South African way of life, men who will regard their primary task as being the training and educating of young South Africans for this country.

Sir, one may ask: How are you going to get them? I think that basically there are three factors which are important; the one is remuneration and conditions of service; that we all know. We know that the department concerned is currently going into the matter of salaries and conditions of service of teachers. It is important that we note that a salary scale should not exist merely for the purpose of either keeping or attracting people; provision should be made for both of those aspects, i.e. to be able to attract the best people and to retain their services. It is of no use if a man teaches for two years and is then enticed away by private enterprise or commerce and industry. In other words, that man must have a salary structure; the gradient of the scale should be of such a nature that it will keep him there. But over and above this, he should also have prospects, and this should be embodied in the structure of this hierarchy of teaching as an occupation, a profession. In other words, it should always be possible to hold out the prospect to him of eventually being able to reach the pinnacle of this pyramid within the hierarchy of the teaching profession. But something, which I believe can in fact serve as a retaining factor is that consideration will have to be given to introducing a merit system for teachers as well. If we do wish to attract the best man, the man who will give us outstanding service, we must be able to repay him for that excellent service, that little bit extra, by means of a merit compensation. There is no such merit system in existence at the moment.

In the second instance, it is also very important that we as parents should take one thing into account, i.e. that it is not always the B-level child only whom we should guide into the teaching profession; that it is not always only the child who we are firmly convinced will not succeed as a doctor, or will not become the best of clergymen, or will not be a good accountant or, much less, a good politician. Sir, our English-speaking people in particular should also take cognizance of this. Today too many of our English-medium primary schools have Afrikaans-peaking male and female teachers on their staffs. Let us no longer neglect our duty in this regard—this applies to both the English and the Afrikaans-speaking sectors. Let us encourage our intelligent boys, too, to choose teaching as a profession.

Mr. Speaker, if I may pause for a moment at a third and very important factor, it is this: I think it is time that the teacher searched his own heart to a certain extent, and that talk about the teaching profession should not always be negative. I am referring to the story we have already heard so often: “If I should have a son one day, I should never advise him to become a teacher; look at the long hours; look at the poor treatment; look at the conditions.” Our teachers should positively and actively activate boys to choose teaching as a profession by pointing out the compensation and the rewards attached to being a teacher and an educator.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to conclude with this thought: If in New Zealand, which can, in many respects, particularly as far as rugby is concerned, of course, be compared with South Africa, all the primary school teaching posts are filled and if 38% of them are filled by men, and if in our primary Bantu schools in South Africa 33% of the teachers are men, then we dare not be satisfied with having men filling only 23½% of the posts in our White primary schools. Sir, it is in our national interest not to allow the teaching profession to feel that it is the neglected child or the Cinerella of the professions, but to work together towards achieving one goal, namely to develop this very important mother profession into something of which we can all be proud. Sir, we have just witnessed a record Defence Budget but let us never forget one thing: The ability of a people to defend itself also lies in the calibre of the child who leaves the school desk.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to extend my congratulations and those of hon. members of this House to the hon. member for Pretoria East, who has just made his maiden speech. He tackled a very interesting and very vitally important subject in the life of the community, and I sincerely hope that his career will be tempered by this very excellent first step that he has taken in making this contribution to the debate.

Sir, dealing with the Appropriation Bill, I would like to remind the hon. the Minister of Finance that some two years ago I presented him with a petition signed by approximately 30 000 housewives. This petition was signed by housewives right throughout the length and breadth of the country, housewives in towns and villages and cities. All of them have one main complaint and that is the continuous rise in the cost of living and the difficulties with which they have to contend in meeting the problem of ever-increasing prices and the problem of inflation. The hon. the Minister replied to me in his usual very courteous way and endeavoured to reassure me by expressing the hope that within a reasonable time it would be possible to arrest the process of inflation and to restore normal conditions. I would like to remind the hon. the Minister further that a year ago, in 1973, when he replied to a similar debate, he made the following statement (Hansard, Vol. 44, col. 8705)—

On behalf of those very persons from whom I presented a petition to him two years ago. I make a further appeal to the hon. the Minister. I say to him that the housewives of South Africa today, in contrast with their moderate approach two years ago, are screaming for assistance because they are unable to meet the cost of their food baskets, and they are wondering how long they will be able to continue satisfactorily to meet the wants of their families. The women of South Africa have in many ways expressed this point of view to the Minister; the newspapers have been full of complaints in this regard; a new housewives’ league has been established in South Africa and a deputation has called on the hon. the Minister of Agriculture, but nothing has been done to alleviate the problem.

If one examines the Budget carefully, there seems to be very little there for their comfort. If anything at all, the Budget seems to strike one as a Budget which does not seem to be concerned anymore with arresting inflation. The hon. the Minister sat back like a satisfied banker with his coffers full, with all his fears of a deficit being wiped out by an enormous additional surplus. He has budgeted for a surplus for the future and he has allowed only a few crumbs to drop from his desk so that those of his customers who were somewhat unhappy could find some little comfort. I do not find in the Budget that the hon. the Minister has made any concessions that could satisfy the people of our country, particularly the needy. Here I have in mind more particularly the millions of people in South Africa who virtually are being reduced to a standard of nutrition which is very near to the danger line of malnutrition. The hon. the Minister of Agriculture knows very well what I mean because he has under his control 25 control boards, in respect of which at the moment there is a commission of inquiry, but control boards which have done everything but control the proper distribution and the reasonable costing of foodstuffs in this country.

There is no commission investigating it.

There is a commission. I can refer the hon. the Minister to a newspaper report which I think cannot be denied, and has in fact not been denied. There is a commission and so also has the Consumer Council. I will give the Minister the information shortly, but there is a commission sitting and my hon. friend behind me will deal with this issue when he addresses the House. Here we are. There was a statement in The Star of 29 May 1974 saying “Marketing inquiry is told of monopoly”. It says—

If you read any newspaper, in fact, and if one wants to think of censoring newspapers or censoring any writings today, perhaps the only thing that the Government can find any fault with is newspapers of recent days referring to the rising price of food and the difficulties we are labouring under in this country without any apparent tips being taken to alleviate the situation. When butter is imported at a time when there is an absolute shortage and is in fact so severely rationed that most people cannot get hold of it, a shipment of butter arrives but is still subject to customs and excise. That is a nice situation to find in the country. Even that little bit of assistance or concession has not been voluntarily extended by a Government which is bulging with the fruits of the good days of the last few years. Here is another article in another newspaper referring to “The great food bungle” and it says—

It even went so far as to compare it with the Government’s other forms of “kragtigheid”, but I do not want to be nasty about it. But it says that the Government is so “kragdadig” when it comes to banning demonstrations or endorsing people out. So you see, Sir, there are comparisons which people make. I do not want to make them but it indicates what the people are thinking. Sir, with every newspaper we pick up you read “Housewives on the price warpath”; “The high cost of living”; “Housewives want more change”; “Paying makes me feel quite sick; says the average housewife”. In fact, Sir, what the Government has now instilled into the minds of the populace, is a psychosis of food prices. Not a day goes by without prices rising and budgets shrinking in so far as purchasing power is concerned. When one takes into account the prices of essential foodstuffs over the last 12 months, one finds that they have risen by 12,5%. We have heard a great deal of the efforts which have been made, including those contained in this Budget, to increase wages, salaries, pensions and other forms of income, but these have been completely outweighed by the increase in the cost of living. The cost of living has exceeded increases of 10% and as much as 15% which people have received in their salaries. While the Government was, a year ago, able to boast that wages were rising faster than the cost of living, the last 12 months have debunked that theory completely. Does the hon. the Minister, who is a very benevolent person, realize that the average White person in the lower income group spends at least 71 % of his income on food and shelter, as compared with 50% in the case of persons in the slightly higher income groups? The Black people spend a minimum of 50% of their income on food alone. I would imagine that with the increase in prices over the last two months, that figure has probably gone up to 60%.

We have here a Budget which boasts a surplus of nearly R700 million for last year, and a surplus of well over R400 million for this year, but one must bear in mind that the country has been blessed with exceptional natural resources. The reason for these surpluses is not to be found in any brilliance of administration, even though I do not decry the ability of the administration.

Why not?

I am talking about the administration and not the Government’s policy. Bearing all this in mind, one realizes that we have great advantages which other countries do not have. Most countries do not have the strength behind them which all this wealth has given us. We have the ability to buy so much time to enable us to clear a problem of this nature. Food subsidies could, for example, have been paid on an entirely different basis. The control boards could have handled the situation differently. Even the price of powdered milk, which is absolutely basic to the nutrition of the Black people in the rural areas, and to the nutrition of a considerable number of the poorer Whites, has increased by some 20%—and even this is becoming scarce. These are the difficulties with which this country is faced.

Inflation is an eroding disease in our economy, but the hon. the Minister has virtually failed to touch upon it, except for passing references in his Budget speech. To mention just one example, a widow or pensioner living on R2 000 per annum will find, over a period of four to five years, that the buying power of that money will drop by virtually a half. What is the future that lies before the people of South Africa when we have a Budget presented to us without even a forecast of trends? I do not want to go into the details which other members on this side have very ably given as to the cause of this inflation, but I do want to say that there is no other country in this world which is in such a happy and fortunate position as South Africa when it comes to fighting inflation. No country finds itself in such a happy position because, as has been pointed out, we have gold and the greatest pool of labour in existence. We have a consumer market that is waiting to be tapped. Growth is therefore not a problem in South Africa. The problem in South Africa is that the hon. the Minister of Finance, who is a noted economist not only here but abroad as well, has to frame his Budget within the limits of ideologies from which he cannot break away. That is unfortunate because this country has every opportunity to meet this problem of inflation. On behalf of the housewives of this country I would like to say that the hon. the Minister must take note of them. The Government must not delude itself as a result of past successes in elections that all is well, because things very often change very suddenly and unfortunately do so in a manner no one even likes to picture. This is the difficulty. People in this country are feeling the strain very much indeed. What is ludicrous, is that it has been calculated that at the present rate of inflation a house which costs R30 000 today will by the year 2000 cost R358 000. A cinema ticket costing R2 today with the present rate of inflation will cost R24. These are examples of the ridiculous extremes to which one could carry this process of inflation when nothing is done to halt it. When the hon. the Minister tries to excuse it on the ground that it is imported inflation—and I do not want to go into details why it is not—I can tell him immediately that imported inflation can only apply to what we receive from other countries. Other countries may have inflation and their goods may come here at inflated prices. In the same way their money could demand inflated interest rates, and so on, but they have a problem to contend with because their whole attitude to living is entirely different to ours. This is so because they do not have the potential wealth we have. We, outside of the Arab countries which are saturated with gold because of their oil, are the only country in the world that can comfortably face up to this question of inflation and take steps to try to meet it and alleviate the problems that face us.

I exhort the Government to take some steps with regard to the cost of food. I exhort them, because I think it is in the interest of many millions of people, and not only the Whites amongst whom there are many hundreds of thousands suffering under this burden, but also Coloureds, Indians and Blacks, who are going to suffer even more unless something is going to be done to arrest inflation. It does not matter to us how much surplus the hon. the Minister is going to show. It does not matter to us what concessions he is going to give in the long term. It does not matter to us what concessions he is going to give in the upper income brackets. What matters is what he is going to do now. What matters is the health of the nation at this stage, a nation that can fall into a state of malnutrition which will result in our having to spend many millions of rand to rehabilitate it.

Mr. Speaker, according to statistics I am today the 931st member since 1910 to rise and make a maiden speech here. Since I came here from the Other Place, mine may perhaps be called an “old maid’s speech this time”. Several of these 931 hon. members eventually became brilliant debaters whose names will remain recorded in the annals of this Parliament. Others had a shortlived and lustreless stay here. May I express the hope that there will be few falling stars in the crop of 1974. We have already had a foretaste of the good talent which has found its way here. When Langenhoven moved from this hon. House to the Other Place, he said he had fallen from below to above. I am privileged in that I could climb from above to below. I am thankful and feel honoured to be a member of this House. One feels insignificant and small when one rises here, here where critical eyes and ears soon cut one and one’s illusions of grandeur back to size, here where great men of our nation stood before one’s time and helped to chisel out the future of our country. In my mind’s eye I can see a row of great men in these front benches: Gen. Smuts, mentally alert; Dr. Malan, stately and dignified; Adv. Strijdom, fiery fighter; and Dr. Verwoerd with his grand visions. I should humbly like to pay tribute to them and to others who left us such a rich and fine democratic heritage. It shall also be my endeavour to preserve and protect this heritage at all times.

Almost a quarter of a century ago I had the privilege of being able to sit in the Press Gallery up there. Those were stormy times, hard words were exchanged down here, and the tension sometimes reached breaking point during night sittings which continued for many hours. To me it was an experience to see our democratic machine in action in such stormy times, and I came to the conclusion that in spite of the shortcomings which in fact the democratic system has, there was no better form of government in the world than our democratic system, and that nowhere in the world democracy functioned as powerfully and as purely as in fact it did here. I greet my former colleagues up there in their literally elevated and almost unassailable position. I can assure them that it is much easier up there than it is down here. When I used to sit up there, I did not think so, but I know better now. Those people in the Press Gallery up there command a mighty weapon which democracy has placed in their hands. Out there they can make or break a member of Parliament, especially we young ones who have yet to find our feet. However, we know that it is their code to wield that weapon with care, with responsibility, with correctness and above all with fairness. We are thankful for that. Whether we sit up there or stand down here, there is something which we all owe to South Africa, namely loyalty—one common allegiance to South Africa. We may not say, write or do anything which might harm our country or damage its good name.

In my first speech in this high forum in our country I should like to make an appeal. What I am pleading for will not cost any money. The hon. the Minister of Finance will not have to make provision for it. I want to appeal to the loyalty of every man, every woman and every child—White, Brown or Black—in this country. The threats to our country are becoming increasingly greater and more severe; the wolves are howling on our borders. World communism is seeking our downfall since we are a stumbling-block in its path. Covetous eyes are fixed upon our country. What does a people do in circumstances such as these? It stands together, it pools its strength and tries to make its country as strong as possible in every respect. We honour the sons of South Africa who are making sacrifices on our borders in difficult and dangerous circumstances in order to watch over our safety. They set us an example of patriotism and loyalty to our country. The successful action against terrorism and subversive activities must mainly be attributed to their deep sense of duty and loyalty—the Police and soldiers of South Africa. It is imperative that we should be militarily prepared, but it is vitally important that we should be economically strong and viable. It is also important that we should spiritually be prepared. A country such as South Africa, with its special problems, can be vulnerable. That is why it is so necessary for South Africa to remain economically viable and to try as far as possible to be self-sufficient without isolating itself. A strong economy is the mightiest weapon against a hostile world and enables a country to absorb shocks. Exceptional economic and industrial achievements are expected of us in the years ahead. Much greater emphasis will have to fall on economic achievement and productivity. Fortunately South Africa’s economic progress is such that it cannot be halted. Our country has been placed on the road of dynamic growth and development, and our political stability gives us a firm foundation for economic growth. In addition to that South Africa is a country with enormous potential. We cannot be too thankful for that. We have riches which fill us with deep thankfulness and pride. There are, inter alia, our gold, our diamonds and our black gold, i.e. our coal. Then there are our pulsating industries, undertaking grain-fields and the golden fleece of our flocks of sheep, but South Africa’s greatest gift is its human material with their alert minds and their industrious hands. At the present juncture a country’s greatest asset is a loyal labour force, such as South Africa in fact has, a labour force that believes that intimidation and strikes do not solve labour problems. We have a labour force whose stability sets an example to the workers of other countries; we have a labour force which has always placed South Africa’s interests before its own, and which couples its demands with realism. I want to pay tribute to our country’s corps of workers which is doing a mammoth task for the advancement of South Africa. Some of them are making major sacrifices. In my own constituency there are railwaymen and other workers who daily work many hours of overtime to keep our country’s wheels of industry turning. This is often done at the expense of their families and their health. South Africa is greatly indebted to them. A country and a people become strong and great through hard work. It is the cornerstone of all progress. There is no instant recipe for success except faithful, sustained hard work. Industrious hands build great and independent nations. We must work harder. This applies to the sun-tanned farmer on the ploughland, to the hardy tradesman, to the messenger and the driver, the road builder, the housewife, the lecturer and his student, the teacher and his pupil, the businessman, the leader of the people and the man who occupies the highest position as well as the man who occupies the lowest position. Everyone must be possessed with the idea that what he is doing, he is not doing for himself. He should know that he is not doing it for his employer, but that he is actually doing it for South Africa. If South Africa wants to achieve the optimum economic result, its people will have to be prepared to roll up their sleeves and by working harder, to help South Africa out of the dilemma of inflation in which we and the rest of the outside world find ourselves.

When I plead for harder work, our corps of workers must not interpret it as a charge to the effect that they are not doing their duty. My plea is not being directed at a particular group; it is a clarion call to the entire people. It does not only apply to the man who earns his living by his hands; it also applies to us here in the highest Debating Chamber in our country. Perhaps it is even more applicable to us, since we have to set an example to the country.

It is a well-known fact that the greatest cause of inflation in any place in the world is to be found in too low a level of productivity. It is a world tendency, and perhaps it is also a human tendency, to want to receive the maximum for a minimum amount of effort. The barb of inflation lies in the very fact that salaries are rising much more rapidly than productivity. It is the same all over the world. In order to curb inflation, the rate of productivity should be higher than the rate of inflation. Today I should like to make the statement here in very great earnest that we receive more, we should all be prepared to give more. If we give less than we claim for ourselves, the economy will decline as it is doing today in many of the old, established countries. If our people want to receive higher and higher salaries, if they want to live in luxurious and well-equipped homes, if they want to possess two or more cars per family and if they want to retain a five-day working week, which sometimes starts early on a Friday afternoon already, it must go hand in hand with greater labour achievements and more enterprise. We grant every man the right to enjoy the fruits of his labours, but nations and civilizations have fallen because they have given themselves over to comfort, luxury and dissipated enjoyment of life. It seems as though there are Western nations that are again following this suicide path. South Africa should see a warning in this.

Greater productivity does not mean that my working hours will be longer. It merely means that I shall have to do more in my ordinary, normal working time. It means that I should take pride in my work and that my performance and productivity should be in accordance with my capabilities. If I should argue, as it is so often done, that I am being paid the same whether I do little or much, then it is not only the employer who is losing; it is also South Africa that is on the losing end. Productivity is the life-blood for the economic growth of a nation. It cuts right across the economy. It means the optimum utilization of all production resources. There is not a single facet of a country’s productive capacity that is not affected by it. It brings about higher levels of economic welfare and the higher growth rate that we so earnestly desire. A people works itself up to the top. Germany and Japan are good examples of this. Our people who have visited Japan, cannot say enough about the diligence of these people. A survey of 28 000 workers which was undertaken by the Department of Labour in a city such as Tokyo, brought to light a very interesting fact. I want to quote from The Star of 20 July 1972. It concerns the diligence of the Japanese. This survey brought to light—

In reply to a question they said: “I am happiest when I am devoting myself to work.” Is it not possible for this to become our philosophy of life in this country as well?

The amount of work done also depends on the management to a large extent. It also depends on the employer, not only on the worker. Employers should see to it that their undertaking is organized and arranged in such a way that labour can be utilized to the maximum. According to estimates 500 million man-hours are lost in South Africa annually owing to bad organization and the misapplication of labour. In certain departments of our construction industry production has apparently not even reached the 50% mark. This means that these people do not perform a full half-day’s work per day. That does not necessarily imply that they are slow, but they are not being used correctly. Entrepreneurs ought to direct all their efforts at increased productivity and at efficiency and increased competition so that more work may be done by fewer people in a shorter period and more goods may be produced at lower prices by using less labour. The non-Whites, too, will have to be far more productive in order to compensate for the high wages they receive. They will also have to be used far more productively. The Bloemfontein Chamber of Industries recently took the initiative in guiding the Bantu towards increased productivity, when the Republic’s first project for this purpose was tackled in Bloemfontein. The centre offers non-Whites the opportunity of improving their skill in certain trades.

South Africa opens up its hands and its heart to its inhabitants and lavishes its riches upon us so that we have a standard of living which few countries can equal. However, in the years ahead this country, this beautiful country of which we are all so proud, is going to ask greater sacrifices of us. In the difficult times ahead, South Africa will require greater loyalty from us and make greater demands on our loyalty in exchange for the riches of its soil, its clean, clear air, its sweeping plains, its miles of golden beaches and basking sunbeams. South Africa requires pluck and a spirit of enterprise from us in times of crisis. What South Africa asks of us is that we should not, at the very time when storm clouds are gathering, wrap our talents in a sweat cloth, but display confidence by being enterprising and by daring. The great Albert Schweizer said that confidence inspires confidence, and what is more true than that? South Africa is proud of its businessmen, its economists and its leaders, who do not turn to sack-cloth and ashes when things go against us, but who then plan and undertake things with enthusiasm. There is nothing quite as negative and as destructive as are lamentations and tales of doom. South Africa has already been developed into an industrial giant which can take its place among leading countries. That is because we had men who dreamed, thought and did things on a large scale in times when it took courage to do so. We honour them for that.

By way of summary I should like to say this: What this beautiful young country of ours needs today is idealism and optimism. What we need is courage and faith in the future of South Africa. The least that South Africa asks of us is loyalty, and South Africa is indeed entitled to the loyalty of all of us. Then it also asks of us that we should all lend a hand in cultivating the fields of our fatherland. Mr. Speaker. I have come here to serve. I humbly offer my services. May it redound to His honour.

Mr. Speaker, it is a particularly pleasant privilege for me to congratulate the hon. member for Bloemfontein North on his maiden speech. Since he comes from the Other Place, we know what his contribution can be and we are particularly grateful to be able to have him with us in this House. We want to wish him a long and prosperous sojourn here.

Mr. Speaker, over a number of centuries in the past, the course of world history has often been determined by the relationship between church and state. In the past this relationship between church and state has determined the destiny of nations and people. The history of our own South Africa as well, has not been left uninfluenced by this factor. Over the past decade in particular, this factor has become of primary importance. The relationship between Christian politics church and state, will continue to be of fundamental importance to an increasing extent.

When we speak of the relationship between church and state, there are certain essential truths, based on our Christian belief, which must serve as a premise. The government does not belong to itself. The government belongs to God and to no one else. That is why the government must always be under God, even in its vilest degeneration. That is why the believer sees in the government, God’s will and God’s handiwork, even when it no longer seems that anything is coming of the purpose for which God established the government. The believer is primarily and essentially for the government—for any government. Any government is preferable to no government. The harshest tyranny is always better and more useful than no order at all. Fanatics who think that governments should be done away with, are devoid of all humanity and breathe nothing but cruel barbarism. This fundamental pro-government disposition is surely also contained in the pronouncement, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s”. With the government as the regulator of the sword it is God’s wish to preserve humanity from the abyss of self-destruction and chaos.

Mr. Speaker, whoever denies or loses sight of this inescapable connection between church and government, unavoidably finds himself on the wrong track. He reduces the church to a professional faultfinder. That is when the church follows behind the government, carping and irresponsible, putting a label on every government action. To do this is no art, and it serves nobody’s interests. It would be senseless for any government to take any notice of it. It is not the task of the church to speak in negatively critical terms only. The church should also speak formatively and positively; not only how things should not be done, but also how things should in fact be done. And too, not just by speaking, but by putting their own shoulder to the wheel, by participating responsibly in politics and accepting joint responsibility for the good government of the country. Only thus does the church find itself and its service to government and people at a prophetic level. Only then does it preach with authority. In this way the church does not follow behind the government, finding fault, but devoutly leads the government. Criticism and condemnation the government gets from all sides, but it is given to the church alone to see further and to hear devotedly in the faith.

In respect of the situation in South Africa this means that those churches which are convinced that multi-national development is the pattern of society which can best serve the interests of all people, will testify to that fearlessly. It means, too that the churches should fearlessly and unceasingly insist on an honest facing of the consequences and an uncompromising acceptance of the implications of multinational development. There are still, alas, a saddening number of our people, members of the church, but also office-bearers of the government, who support multinational development because they think it is a way of safeguarding White supremacy and preventing equality. In this regard the church should testify clearly and unequivocally that multi-national development seeks to put an end to supremacy in a peaceful way and to realize equality. The church will also have to urge the government to employ the most just and fair methods possible in the implementation of this policy.

But then, the church will also have to urge unceasingly that the people, both White and non-White, must be prepared to make for the good of all those sacrifices of personal comfort, personal convenience and happiness, which the realization of this policy will demand. In this way the government should not be hampered, but aided in its task.

The church subjects itself to the government and it obeys the laws of the land because it knows that these things are part of what it owes the state in obedience to God. Because the church, in faith, knows the order of God the church itself is never a disorderly entity. That is why it is never an agitator or a clandestine subverter of the existing order. It is by no means favourable evidence when the government has to take action against believers who disobey the laws of the land or endanger the security of a country. The church has a duty to itself in this respect, too, and that is to oppose anarchy and sabotage of the government within its own ranks. But on the other hand, what the church expects of the government is not an insertion of Bible texts or dogmatic pronouncements in its legislation. What the church requires from the government and must demand from it, is ordinary good politics. To the church, good politics is the kind of politics for which the church is directed to pray. That is the kind of politics which allow us to lead a quiet and peaceful life in all piety and dignity.

Law on earth—that, above all is what the government owes to the people. That, above all, is what the church may and must demand from the government. Law and order, says the Bible, is the most indispensable requirement for the progress of the gospel. But in the second half of the 20th century, too the church will certainly not be able to do anything else but allow itself to be informed by the Bible, that law and order serve the progress of the gospel better than chaos and anarchy. To anyone to whom the progress of the gospel is the primary consideration, anything would be preferable to chaos and anarchy. For the church, the progress of the gospel must not be the primary consideration, but the only consideration. There are, of course other bodies and persons with other considerations for whom chaos and anarchy are advantageous. These bodies and persons may not speak in the church nor may they speak through the church. The church must demand from the government that they be mercilessly eradicated. After all, the church knows that the government is there to maintain law and order, even with the sword if necessary.

Next to law and order, the church may expect from the government the protection of justice and the freedom of people. Politics which, in the opinion of the church, constitutes a threat to the perpetuation of justice and the freedom of the Whites and the non-Whites, must be condemned by the church as bad politics. A state in which the government over-emphasizes the maintenance of law and order, ultimately presents the spectacle of a Nazi Germany. A state in which the government over-emphasizes the protection of justice and the freedom of people, ultimately presents the chaotic spectacle of a French revolution. Neither of these extremes serves the progress of the gospel. That is why the church requires of the government the maintenance of the equilibrium between law and order on the one hand and justice and freedom on the other.

Only so much justice and freedom as does not endanger the maintenance of law and order is possible. Only so much law and order as does not unnecessarily harm the freedom of people is desirable. That is why there is such a thing as the declaration of a state of emergency and the promulgation of emergency measures. No responsible government dare shrink from employing these measures. No responsible church dare find fault with them.

Sir, the prophetic task of the church does not exclude criticism. Of course the church may criticize, as long as the criticism by that church is well-founded. Over the past decade criticism has been heaped on the church, on the people and on the government of the Republic of South Africa from all sides. It is important to investigate the origin of this criticism. It is inspired chiefly by the intellectual atmosphere which developed during and after the Second World War. After the war, which was a war against the German racism, an anxious search began for new ways to approach human relations, because a solution to the problem of human relations had to be found in order to prevent a third world conflict.

In this situation the church had a right to expect that a world which had emerged from such a crucible, would come to seek the solution to this problem in the World of God, from Him, the incarnate Word, in Whom God makes the hearts of men new. But this did not happen. A supposed solution was found in the humanistic cry of the French Revolution, namely “Liberty, equality and fraternity”. The U.N. was brought into being as the instrument for arranging, on this basis, the co-existence of the various peoples and races on one planet. By these means a start was made with the process of equalization. All differences between people and nations had to be eliminated, because they were seen as the cause of friction. In this way the U.N. became a world platform for the propagandist criticism emanating from the Afro-Asian bloc. Various Western countries still allow themselves to be used for this purpose.

Accordingly this world organization had to serve chaos and anarchy, something which suited the book of various countries in Africa and the East very well. So it did in fact occur that in the assembly halls of this world body it became a reality that “Those who do injury are considered worthy; those who defend themselves are criminals; and the States which limit themselves to securing order in their territories are being incriminated by the very countries that are the root of disorder created there.” Limitless rights and freedom are demanded for people who do not yet realize what the responsibility of freedom consists of and who see freedom only as a condition in which everything is permissible.

The church will be unable to join these critics because the church is unable to subscribe to their aims. The premise of their criticism, namely humanism, cannot be the premise or criterion of the church. If the church’s criticism forms part of its prophetic task which it is called upon by God to perform, then it surely follows from that that the church’s criticism can have no other premise or norm but the Word of God. Humanism can never qualify for this nor can the church in its criticism of the government cry with the wolves in the wilderness, even though they may be humane wolves.

Because the church knows what God’s intentions are for the government and the world, it is unable to side with people who stridently demand limitless rights and freedoms. Law and order are indispensable to the welfare of all people and the prayers of the gospel. That is why one has often stood dumbfounded at the criticism expressed by the World Council of Churches. When we expected them to speak, they were silent. When we expected them to take the part of refugees and victims of rape, they were silent or even took the part of the murdering terrorists. The recipe offered by the World Council of Churches for solving the questions and problems of the so-called Third World, is the theology of revolution. To be able to do this, the Western world must be changed and the battle-cry that has been adopted it, “As Christians we are committed to working for transformation of society”.

To the question of how that transformation of society should take place, the unanimous answer is that it should take place by means of revolutionary change. Whether such revolutionary change will be violent or not, is regarded as “indifferent”. The essence of the concept “revolution”, they describe as “radical renewal”.

In this way, too, the so-called great injustice in our South African society is to be rectified. Our South African churches and our people have their faults as do other churches and other peoples in other parts of the world. The un-Christian attitude and concern. We certainly want to do everything in our power to rectify this in a peaceful way. However, who in our country has asked them to come and rectify the injustice here? Is it the Afrikaans-language churches? I do not believe so. Is it the English-language churches? I do not believe that either. Is it the Black churches? That, too I definitely do not believe. No, with the possible exception of a few politically frustrated clerics, the Black and the White inhabitants of this country are prepared to rectify the injustices which may exist among us, themselves. We do not need the help of strangers to put our affairs in order here.

Why is the World Council of Churches so concerned about the so-called injustice in South Africa? Why should they be less concerned about the injustices in other parts of the world, injustices which cry to high heaven? Is it really the injustice in South Africa that is worrying these people? Do they really want “transformation of society” to come and rectify the “injustice” here? Do they not perhaps covet the wealth of the South African soil?

In its “Programme to Combat Racism” the World Council of Churches has donated 1 050 000 dollars to various organizations throughout the world over the past four years. Of this amount, 740 000 dollars—in other words, more than 70%—has been applied towards rectifying the “injustice” in Southern Africa. The “injustice” in Southern Africa therefore justifies 70%, and the “injustice” in the rest of the world, only 30%.

Over the past few years the World Council of Churches has made 100 000 dollars available for the maintenance of Portuguese who have fled their country to avoid military service, as well as for soldiers who deserted to the enemy from the armies of Mozambique, Angola and Guinea-Bissau. This means that the World Council of Churches has encouraged and helped people to commit treachery towards their own people. I have difficulty in imagining anything worse than that!

Since this money of the World Council of Churches is probably no longer required in Portuguese territories at present, it is interesting to note that there are people within our own ranks now who are beginning to make efforts to discourage military service. The church will have to guard against this trend, because the church is unable to side with these critics.

It has happened many times in the course of world history that the fate of nations and people has been determined by the relationship between church and state. In the case of the South African people, too, this will be no different. That is why it must always be our humble and child-like prayer that God in His omnipotence will so order things that out of the relationship between church and state in South Africa, law and order, justice and freedom will flow—law and order, justice and freedom in praise of His holy name and for the good of all people.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure this afternoon to congratulate the hon. member for Geduld on his maiden speech. He has spoken on a subject which I know is topical at the moment and to which, I have noticed, hon. members on that side and, particularly, members of the Cabinet have paid attention. I believe that the hon. member has made a contribution to this debate, a debate which revolves around a Budget presented by a Minister of Finance who is so glutted with money at the moment that he does not know what to do with it. The hon. the Minister of Finance represents a Government which has a Minister of Agriculture who does not know what to do to help the people of South Africa ... [Interjections.] ... a Minister of Agriculture who is not prepared to help the housewife to feed her family. But I shall come back to that hon. the Minister in a little while. I was hoping that the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs would be here as well, but unfortunately I believe he is busy with other affairs. I believe I have to draw to the attention of this House the fact that during 1973 the Consumer Price Index rose by 10%. I must also draw to the attention of this House that that index is weighted by the cost of luxury items. I am very glad that the hon. the Prime Minister is here because I should like to hear from him whether he is proud of the fact that during 1973 the cost of living to persons with fixed incomes and the cost of living to the lower income groups in South Africa rose by no less than 17,2%. I sincerely hope that we shall hear from the hon. the Prime Minister or, if not from him, from the hon. the Minister of Finance when he replies to this debate, whether he is in fact proud of this achievement, an achievement of a Government that has been in power so long that it has forgotten what it is not to be in power. Perhaps that is the reason why the cost of living did rise by 17,2%. They have forgotten what it is to be in opposition and to have to go out and seek the support of the people outside. That is why, in their arrogance, they have totally lost touch with the man in the street and the difficulties which the man in the street is experiencing.

That is only part of the picture. What is the picture for 1974? During the first three months of this year the effective increase in the cost of living to the people with fixed incomes and those in the lower income groups has been no less than 11½%. And I do not quote my figures; I quote the figures of the official bulletin of hon. the Minister’s department. This includes increases of 26,6% in the price of clothing, 12,3% in the cost of fuel and lighting and 10,7% in the price of food. The price of cleaning materials, soaps, etc., has increased by 10,1%. The price of petrol has gone up by 25%. Then I should like to refer to products in the hon. the Minister of Agriculture’s field. The price of maize products has risen by 12½% and milk has had two increases totalling 25% during the past five months. Then I want to refer to milk products such as powdered milk. My hon. friend from Jeppe who made the hon. the Minister so angry earlier on is quite right.

The price of powdered milk has gone up by 18%. Unfortunately, however, there is a slight difference between my hon. friend from Jeppe and myself. I believe the hon. the Minister told me that the increase was due to the fact that we were importing powdered milk. The hon. member for Jeppe said that it is because there is a shortage. I believe that we are at one although we might be saying it in different words. I say that it is because of the shortage that we are importing. That is why South Africa is compelled to pay an extra 18% for powdered milk. The same applies to condensed milk. In the case of meat prices the percentage has gone so high that I do not know where it is. The price of frozen vegetables increased by 15% during April. The price of steel—steel, which affects every single thing from the kitchen right through the whole house—increased by 25%. The hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs who, as I have said, is otherwise engaged, in announcing this increase of 25% apologized that it was “only 25%”. He said that the Government had felt that they had to keep the increase down to only 25%. What sort of support is this for the man in the street? How does the man in the street expect to get by when he is faced with these tremendous increases? Interest rates on bonds have increased to 10,5% and they are to be increased further as a result of the actions of the hon. the Minister of Finance. I want to say in passing that one of the significant features of this Budget is not what is included in the Budget, but what is being done outside the Budget, such as the raising of the bank rate and the increase of the usury rate. These are the things that are significant. A little while ago I heard that the hon. the Minister of Agriculture was even considering an increase of something like 10% in the price of eggs.

What!

He was considering this ...

Who told you that?

No matter who told me that. The hon. the Minister can tell us whether he was considering such an increase or not. The hon. the Minister shakes his head.

I did not consider that.

Was the hon. the Minister asked to consider it?

Yes.

He was asked to consider it, but he rejected it. I want to know whether this House knows why he rejected it. He rejected it because I challenged him not to increase the price. [Interjections.] I asked him not to grant such an increase and I pointed out the tremendous surplus which we have, a surplus which we are exporting and on which we will lose some R3 million this year. That is why he did not do it. What did he do with margarine? [Interjections.] At the time when there was tremendous pressure on the very short supplies of butter that we had, he allowed a price increase of 22% on the price of margarine. I do not believe that any of these increases were justified. Let us go further. During April he allowed an increase of 18% in the price of frozen vegetables and packaged meats such as sausages, polony, etc. I should not say that he allowed it because I cannot blame him for this one, but certainly this is what was allowed by the Government.

Go on, blame him!

What is the position now, in August? The prices of the same products are going up by a further 15%. What is the Government doing? They are not doing anything whatsoever to try to alleviate the burden that is being placed on the housewife of South Africa. In fact, it goes even further. The hon. the Minister of Agriculture only last week announced an increase of 20% in the price of butter. That is how they help the housewife of South Africa. I am afraid that the position in the first three months of this year with regard to inflation, the increase in the cost of living, or call it what you will, has effectively wiped out any wage increases which were granted by the Government to civil servants or by the private sector to their employees during the last year. Is it a wonder that we are facing a situation today where labour unrest is what it is? People are demanding more money. They must have more money to make ends meet. I want to quote a few other statistics which appear under the heading “Producer price index shows steep rise”, as follows:

These are not figures which have been published by any Opposition-orientated newspaper. Also, these are not figures I am drawing out of the air or sucking out of my thumb. These figures come from the hon. the Minister of Agriculture’s own department and are taken from a copy of Agricultural News of 7 June 1974. Sir, do you wonder why I say that this is a Government which has completely lost contact with the man in the street and which no longer has any sympathy whatsoever for him? Why has the hon. the Minister of Agriculture not introduce subsidies? Why is the position with milk today that it is cheaper to buy a litre of Coca-Cola than to buy a litre of milk? I want to ask the hon. the Minister of Agriculture and his bench-mate, the hon. the Minister of Health, whether they are happy that the people in the lower income groups in South Africa today must choose to buy Coca-Cola rather than milk for their children. It is a fact that today you can buy a litre of Coca-Cola for 20c net while a litre of fresh milk today is 25c.

With the bottle.

No, with the bottle it costs 28c. There is a return of 3c on the bottle. That hon. Minister must not play with me. He knows I have a supermarket and that I know these prices.

Let me deal with this hon. Minister. Quite honestly, I do not know where to start with him. When one starts talking about butter or the dairy industry, where does one start? I think we shall start at the end. Let us start with his latest increase of 20%, which amounts to 20c on a kilo of butter. The price of butter has gone up from R1 to R1,20 per kilo, or as far as the housewife is concerned, from 50c to 60c for a 500 g pack. The hon. the Minister announced that this had to go up. Actually, I beg your pardon, he did not announce it; the Dairy Board did. The Dairy Board said it had to go up “in order to stimulate the production of butter fat and butter”. I do not believe that that is the truth. What is the producer getting? For the next three months only, as a temporary increase, the producer is going to get 10c per kilo of butter fat delivered to the creamery. Now, by my reckoning, this is only half of the increase that has been passed on to the housewife. I wrote to the hon. the Minister and in all fairness I think I must quote his letter. When I wrote to the hon. the Minister I asked him to explain how this increase of 20 cents per kilo was justified. This was his reply—

It was increased by this 20 cents per kilo. The Minister goes on to say—

What is he saying? He has told me nothing. He has given me no reply whatsoever as to how he justifies an increase of 20 cents. I want to stress this point. This special subsidy that is being paid to the cream producer is temporary only for three months. But even with that, it only comes to 15 cents per kilo and the hon. the Minister knows that he gets more than a kilo of butter from a kilo butter-fat. What is happening to the rest? Who is getting it? Is it the butter manufacturer? Is it the wholesale distributor? I know as a retailer that I am getting no more. I want to know where it is going. I believe that the hon. the Minister owes it to this House and to South Africa to tell us where it is going.

Let us deal with another aspect of this matter. Why have we got a shortage of butter in South Africa today? Why do we have a shortage of butter when at the beginning of this year we had a surplus that we could not give away anywhere in the world? We had to export it at a loss.

It went bad.

Why did it go bad? That is something else that this hon. the Minister has to answer for.

They want to milk the country dry.

I believe that the inefficiency in the two boards which control the dairy products in this country has been so shocking that if I did not believe that it was the bad leadership that this hon. Minister has given them, I would today be demanding their resignation or their sacking. It is only because I believe, however, that this hon. Minister and this Government have failed to give them the leadership that they were entitled to, that I am not asking for their resignation. However, they have failed in their task. They have completely misread the situation in South Africa. When you have a statement by the Manager of the Dairy Board that he did not know that price was the factor controlling the consumption of butter, then one realizes ...

He is obviously not married!

He is obviously totally out of touch with the true situation in this country. While we had this surplus, the hon. the Minister was struggling to export it and he was unable to export it. Then came the election of April announced by the hon. the Prime Minister. What did we find the situation to be then? Then we had this hon. Minister of Agriculture using butter as a loss-leader.

Thirty-five cents.

Down to 35 cents per 500 g pack to buy votes for the Nationalist Party on 21st April.

We increased the price of fresh milk at the same time.

At the time when I warned the housewives of South Africa that this would not last for three months the hon. the Minister said that I was talking nonsense. In actual fact, it lasted only two months.

That is called “buttering up”!

After those two months he had to raise the price again to what it was previously.

May I ask a question?

The hon. the Minister must please understand that I have very little time. The hon. the Minister must understand that here we had a case of reducing the price of butter ...

And of increasing the price of fresh milk on the same day.

Yes, Sir, but I want to ask the hon. the Minister when he replies to me to tell me what the connection is between fresh milk and butter.

But you said we wanted votes.

I have been at him for so many years to tell me what the difference is between fresh milk and butter because they both come from the same product.

One is hard and one is soft.

What is the position? At the time when the hon. the Minister reduced the price to 35 cents he was then exporting butter as well and he had a surplus on his hands. But what was the position in South Africa at that time? The hon. the Minister knows that the production of butter in the country at that time was not meeting the demand. The production of butter had then dropped to 1 930 tons for the month of May and 1 788 tons for the month of June, when he knows that the consumption was over 3 000 tons. He knows that during the month of May consumption in South Africa totalled 3 089 tons of butter. That was after the price came down a bit. But what was the average consumption? He knows that the average consumption of butter has been 3 000 tons a month ever since the beginning of 1972, and he knew that the production had dropped, and he should have known, if he had known anything of what goes in this industry, that the production was going to drop even further.

He does not know these things.

Knowing that the production is not meeting the consumption, he first of all reduces the price to buy votes in the election and then he goes and embarks on a programme of exporting butter, and what do we find? Sir, I am afraid there is a discrepancy in the figures available to me and I hope the hon. the Minister will be able to tell me what the correct figures are.

You are an optimist.

According to figures supplied by the hon. the Minister during this year, since the beginning of January—I can only quote those figures; I cannot quote the individual figures—South Africa has exported 1 450 tons of butter, of which over 1 000 tons was exported after the hon. the Minister found himself in trouble with the production of butter. But, Sir, according to the figures supplied by the hon. the Minister, only 140 tons was exported during May, but I have a little bit of evidence here to the effect that during May 1 130 tons was in fact exported and not 140 tons. I quote as my source of information Agricultural News—again his own periodical—of 21 June 1974, which says that exports amounted to 1 130 tons. This deals with the four-week period ended 1 June 1974; that was for the month of May. The figures that the hon. the Minister has given me regarding butter exports total about 1 450 tons for this year, but my information is that it is in excess of 2 000 tons. Here is evidence of one discrepancy which I sincerely hope the hon. the Minister will be able to explain. But, Sir, whether he can explain this discrepancy or not, this does not exonerate this Government and the two boards concerned from culpability for exporting a basic product which is necessary for the welfare of our people in this country at a time when they should have known, if they had been efficient, that we were entering a period of shortage when there would not be sufficient to feed our own people in this country.

Sir, what is in the future for us in South Africa as long as we have this Government, these two boards and this particular Minister looking after us? I have warned before of a dairy famine, and I believe it is going to come, notwithstanding the fact that officials and members of these two boards say that the whole situation will improve in two months’ time. Sir, a name which has been revered in this House for many years is that of Dr. Bonsman, who was the Director of Animal Husbandry and Dairying in the hon. the Minister’s Department and who has now retired. He was also chairman of a commission of inquiry into the purchasing of milk a few years ago, and he is now warning that unless the Minister does something to stabilize the industry, we are going to be faced with a dairy famine in this country such as we have never known before—even worse than it is now, Sir, what must the hon. the Minister do?

Get out.

The hon. the Minister must do what we have suggested to him over the years, and that is to subsidize basic foodstuffs. We have always said so. When you have a Minister of Finance who is sitting at the moment with a surplus of R675 million, a windfall that he did not expect and did not know he was going to get, and when I look at the Estimates and find that the Minister of Agriculture is in fact reducing the subsidy to be paid on butter, how does he explain that away? He is reducing the subsidy instead of firstly increasing the subsidy and secondly introducing a subsidy on the price of milk. Sir, I believe it is scandalous that in South Africa a person should have to pay more for a litre of milk than I had to pay anywhere in the whole of Europe during a recent trip, and more than you have to pay for a litre of Coke. Admittedly Coke is more expensive in Europe, but I have to pay more here for a litre of milk than I did in Europe. I believe this is scandalous and I disagree entirely with the hon. the Minister. I want to quote from his statement. Unfortunately it has no date on it. It must be his statement of March this year when he said—

Sir, what nonsense! The hon. the Minister knows where the subsidy is paid on butter. It is paid at the creamery. Why cannot he pay the subsidy on milk at the dairy? Why can it not be paid at that point? Sir, the few gallons, the few litres, of milk that are sold outside the controlled areas surely do not concern him at all. I want to put it this way, too, that in respect of the consumers of milk outside the controlled areas and outside of the Eastern Province and outside of Natal, which are not under the control of this Minister’s Milk Board, those few litres which are sold outside are not going to make any difference to the subsidy at all. I believe that this Minister can introduce a subsidy on the price of milk. And today, on behalf of the official Opposition, I demand that he does do just that. Sir, we demand today that he does introduce a subsidy on the price of milk, in exactly the same way as today I am also demanding that the hon. the Minister increase the subsidy on butter which he has planned to pay this year, to this figure which he paid two years ago. Three years ago the subsidy on butter was R11 million. It was reduced to R9 million. What do we find today when we look at the Estimates? For “expenses in connection with the stabilization of the price of butter, R12 749 000” is provided. That is more than R11 million. But this hon. Minister must be honest with us. He must tell us that included in this R12 million is the R5 million for the Nationalist Party election fund, the amount that he spent in subsidizing the sale of butter at 35 cents during the election campaign. R5 million of this R12 million is covered by that, which leaves only R7½ million for the subsidy of butter this year. Sir, today on behalf of the official Opposition I demand also that he restore the level of the subsidy on butter to R11 million. Let him give the housewife of South Africa what is her just due. Sir, I believe I have said enough for the housewife to know who is championing her in this fight against the rising cost of living.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member waxes very lyrical. I am afraid of him. When I hear him carrying on like that, I think of Goliath and I think that he may attack me any moment. But his facts are completely wrong. [Interjection.] The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, who has previously had some sympathy for the farmers, has lost that completely. I should like to put the agricultural standpoint of our side of the House. Firstly I want to present that of the producers. This Government proceeds from the assumption—and this is its conviction—that the producers, the people on the farms, must have confidence in their industry and must be treated well. It is my endeavour to enable the farmers, in every sphere, to be as prosperous as the people in the cities, so that they may also have the opportunity to make a decent living, and so that they can have the opportunity of paying good salaries to their labourers, their non-White labourers, and of giving them good houses to live in. There are so many ideals we want to achieve by establishing a happy farming community (boervolk)—I am now speaking of “boervolk” with a small “b”—but in this kind of argument, where one is given a solution and the only solution is a subsidy, I want to say that the hon. member never mentions the fact that one must also take a look at the price to the primary producer in the platteland. He just speaks about a subsidy and about the housewife, and if we were to implement what he is requesting, it would cost billions of rand. His solution, which he repeatedly proclaims with a shout, is to subsidize, but he will not take a look at the man who has to produce that food under fitful climatic conditions. It is not the fault of the hon. the Minister of Finance or the hon. the Minister of Economic Affairs that the price of diesel fuel has increased by 100%. It is not their fault that agricultural implements have become 30% more expensive.

And the price of steel?

Since the hon. member now wants to compare Coca-Cola and milk overseas, let me just say that the price of steel in the Republic is 20% lower than the cheapest steel one can get overseas. Now there is a 25% adjustment in the price of steel, which does make itself felt throughout our economy. Virtually very product, tyres, fuel, spare-wheels, etc., which are imported production means, have been subject to tremendous price increases. The hon. the Minister of Finance is prepared to subsidize every time, where this is possible in practice, because he realizes that we must have a sound farming community. The hon. the Deputy Minister of Bantu Development referred to a quarter of a million Bantu children who attend farm schools, farm schools which are largely financed by the farmers themselves. Those are the positive contributions that agriculture is making. Agriculture is earning the country a tremendous amount of foreign exchange today, because of positive steps from this side. There is, for example, a fertilizer subsidy and also subsidies on several production means. This year’s fertilizer subsidy will amount to R18 million. But the Government prohibits fertilizer manufacturers from exporting fertilizer, although they could obtain 40% more for the product than we pay for it. We must first provide for our own needs. These are all steps that we take just in passing in order to keep the cost of living at a low level. This year the Minister is giving us an R18 million subsidy on fertilizer.

But that is no argument ...

I am coming to you; just give me a chance. Let us look at what is happening today in the case of maize. The hon. member for Newton Park was given banner headlines in the newspapers when he said how scandalous it is that we were pushing up the maize price to R50 per ton. The fact is that two weeks before the election we pushed up the consumer price of maize to R47 per ton. We were not trying to catch the electorate with good prices. The world price for maize was R114 per ton on Monday. But what do we tell the producer? Sixty million bags must be sold locally, at R47 per ton, in order to keep the cost of living at a low level. The world price for oilseed is R400 per ton. Our producers receive R182 per ton. That is a contribution this Government is making, and we do know that if the industry is in difficulties one day the Minister of Finance will help us. Virtually every product we export today we are exporting at tremendously high prices. But then the hon. member for Jeppe says, “the people of South Africa are underfed”. That is a terrible statement to make.

†Those were the hon. member’s words. How do we spend our money in this country, Mr. Speaker? The Minister of Finance gave us a subsidy of as much as R52 million on bread. Eighteen months ago I suggested that we increase the price of white bread from 11c to 13c and the price of brown bread from 9c to 11c. In this way we would save a subsidy of nearly R20 million. What happened? The underprivileged people, the poor people, refused to eat brown bread which was two cents cheaper than white bread, and today 70% of all bread consumed is white. Now the hon. member for Jeppe says the people of South Africa are underfed.

Bread is not the only staple diet.

How did we spend our money in South Africa last year? A substantial amount was spent on red meat. Let me admit, Sir, that the price of meat is very high.

Oh?

I am not playing politics with agriculture. Last year the whole population spent R879 million on red meat. On grain products, i.e. bread, maize, cereals, etc., R638 million; on fruit and vegetables, R576 million; on milk and eggs. R305 million; on sugar and jams, R252 million; and other foodstuffs, R492 million—in total quite an astronomical figure. The highest expenditure was on red meat namely R879 million. This underfed population last year spent on alcohol R725 million and on Fanta, Coke and all the other jazz the hon. member mentioned just now, they spent R127 million, and on tobacco R290 million. These are the figures for a population that are underfed!

*The hon. member has said that the population is underfed and that he feels very sorry for them.

Why do you say the “underfed” population?

That was what the hon. member for Jeppe said a moment ago while that hon. member was drinking coffee. Let us take the salary of a mineworker in 1960. In 1960 he could buy 13 bags of maize with his weekly salary. In 1966 he could buy 17 bags. With 1972’s salary the same mineworker could buy 25½ bags of maize. Let us now take the case of a factory worker. In 1960 he could buy 155 kg of meat with his salary. In 1966 150 kg and in 1972 185 kg. This is proof that the salary adjustments have not failed to take into account the increase in the cost of living. I honestly want to say that I am sympathetically disposed towards the salaried man, the pensioner and the lower income groups because the cost of living is truly high; it is no use arguing about that. However, when one looks at the increase in a product’s price and what one can obtain for that product overseas, we have a different picture. I want to tell the hon. member that I was in Los Angeles two weeks ago. There I myself visited chain stores, and from there I went to the East. I am not allowed to say that a man is lying, but the price of milk is really much higher in America than it is here in the Republic.

That does not help us.

A moment ago the hon. member said that milk was cheaper there than here in the Republic. It is the hon. member who speaks from time to time about long-term planning and about this “silly” Minister of Agriculture who does not know what is going on in his department.

Hear, hear!

In the Los Angeles Chronicle of 17 July 1974 there is a report under the heading “Milk goes down the drain”. There is also a photograph of the man who is throwing the milk down the drain. I witnessed it myself and went to have a look. I then thought of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South who says that we should apply long-term planning in the Republic and that if he were Minister he would ensure that we never again had a butter shortage or surplus. As I have said previously, even King Solomon would not be able to manage that in this country. In the report I have mentioned, the following is stated—

What happened as far as our butter is concerned? Where did our butter problem start? The hon. member is quite correct in saying that we gave that special subsidy at a time when production decreased. However, we were sitting with more than 2 000 tons of surplus butter which was showing signs of going rancid. Hon. members opposite pressured me from morning to night for permission to have yellow margarine produced. They also did so with my predecessor. We parried and took preventive measures for the sake of our cream producers. Eventually, however, we agreed to have yellow margarine produced. Yellow margarine is available today at a much lower price than butter. Today the South African housewife consumes about 40 000 tons of yellow margarine as against 30 000 tons of butter. In other words the butter market has been supplanted by yellow margarine. At the time there was a surplus of 2 000 tons of butter. The Dairy Board told us they had a quantity of butter which they could export at a loss because it had become old. I then asked the hon. the Minister of Finance, and this had nothing to do with any election, if we could not increase the R9 million subsidy on butter by R5 million so that we could get rid of that surplus butter as soon as possible. That butter was then sold at 35 cents per 500 g instead of our suffering an export loss. Is that now a criminal offence? That same day I myself announced that the price of fresh milk would increase by another 10%. That was seven days before the election. Now the hon. member says, however, that we tried to catch votes by doing this.

What about the few thousand tons of butter which in November ...

We sold that butter in November and only obtained the shipping instructions in June.

Why could that butter not have been made available to the housewife at 35 cents per ½ kg?

We could not sell that portion of the butter because we were already under contract to export it. I can give the hon. member an explanation or elucidation for each of these matters. I think it was last Friday that the hon. member told The Argus, like some great spirit—

I asked the hon. member to serve on a commission of inquiry into the Marketing Act. I told him that my feeling was—I make no secret of this—that there should be one board, a Dairy and Fresh Milk Board. However, I do not want to anticipate the recommendations of that commission. On several occasions I took the hon. member into my confidence by giving him information and telling him where I think we should be heading in agriculture. I have already told him before that I do not play politics with agriculture, because we all have to eat. Whether the hon. member disagrees with me politically or not, whether one is White or Black, makes no difference; we must try to feed 50 million people in this country, although some of them are already as beer-barrelled as the hon. member for Durban Point. I quote further from the newspaper report—

Listen to what he says to the Press.

Just listen to Goliath—

If the hon. member wants to join in the discussion, he must realize that a butter subsidy is a rich man’s subsidy.

Why?

I have already said this before, but I was then involved in an argument. I blindfolded nine housewives. One was given a slice of bread with white margarine, another a slice of bread with yellow margarine and another a slice of bread with butter, and not one of them could tell me what they had eaten. There is no difference in taste between the two. Why must we give expensive subsidies when we should also be looking to the hon. the Minister of Finance’s Estimates? In the future I am going to ask him for even larger subsidies on some of our essential food ingredients. Why must butter be subsidized while we have a cheap spread of plant extraction? I have nothing against butter, and I want us to continue to be able to sell butter. What have we done? We made a mistake when we kept the butter-fat price at its existing level for two years when we saw margarine taking butter’s place on the market. We must remember that agriculture is not a charitable institution, and if a farmer cannot get his price for a product, he no longer produces it. We wanted to keep the price and production of butter at a low level, and we wanted to keep it cheap, but then the farmers switched over and instead of producing butter, they began raising calves for meat.

What about fresh milk?

I shall come to fresh milk. When we found that our butter production was decreasing, and continuing to decrease, we made an adjustment to the price of butter-fat in order to encourage the farmers. The hon. member asked where that 20 cents went to. A portion of that 20 cents went to the producer, a portion to the manufacturer—the manufacturer’s costs have also increased—and a portion went to strengthen the Stabilization Fund because we are now offloading 500 tons of butter. Does the hon. member want us to sell the imported butter to the housewife at the price it cost us to have it landed here? Does the hon. member want that? After all, he says that milk is cheaper overseas than it is here.

No.

Must we sell this imported butter at the price at which it was sold to us in New Zealand?

At cost price, yes.

Then you will in any case pay more than 60 cents per 500 g for it. The Dairy Board needs that revenue to strengthen its funds, and this 20 cents was divided up pro rata. I can furnish detailed particulars of how it was divided up.

Must I then deduce that this imported butter was purchased at a price much higher than that of local butter?

After the purchase price, import duty, etc., had been paid, the imported butter was four cents per kilogram more expensive than our local butter.

But why do you buy such butter?

Order!

I now come to the question of fresh milk. The hon. member carries on ...

Now it must again become more expensive ...

Order!

The hon. member must now pay attention. I just want to answer his question about the fresh milk subsidy. I discussed the matter with the Minister of Finance and asked him whether we could subsidize fresh milk. He said that if we could devise a workable method he would see if he had the money. But when I went to him I said: “Dr. Diederichs, it will not work.”

Why not?

In the first place it is not possible since if we subsidize fresh milk we cannot only subsidize it for nine controlled areas, i.e. the Witwatersrand, Pretoria, Durban and others where we can exercise control, because we want to carry the subsidy through to Sibasa and Vendaland where we find the individuals in the lower income groups who deserve the subsidy. We have no control system in those areas. Apart from that, a subsidy of one cent per litre will cost the State R10 million.

That would still be cheap.

Order! The hon. member has already had his turn to make a speech.

If milk costs 20 cents per litre, as the hon. member has said, then a decrease of one cent per litre is surely a mere trifle. What is 19 cents per litre when this trifling change is going to cost R10 million in any case? One should after all be aware of one’s priorities. We felt that this could not be implemented, because where one wants to subsidize, in those far-lying areas where the Milk Board does not operate, it is going to cost us thousands and thousands of rand in supervision alone and in the control over the subsidizing of milk. I told the hon. the Minister of Finance that however much he wanted to subsidize, however much he wanted to furnish an essential protein foodstuff cheaply, this could not be done in a practical way. If there had been machinery to do it, I would have given further attention to the matter. We can take another look at it.

The hon. member said that vegetable prices had increased by 30%. He is correct, but why has the price increased by 30%? The production of such a commodity as this requires highly-paid labour. The hon. member must remember that the wages of non-Whites on the platteland have been considerably increased. All cost increases that have an influence on farming are not the fault of the Minister of Economic Affairs. The price of tyres, fuel and components necessary in transporting the vegetables from the Lowveld to the Marketing areas have increased tremendously. The farmers have found that they can rather produce other products, for example cotton. There is no governmental price control on vegetables. The hon. member knows that we do not have a pumpkin board because if we did the hon. member would be serving on that board. [Interjections.] It is a product that is sold according to free supply and demand. We have therefore found that farmers are no longer all that anxious to produce vegetables. The present price incentives on the market have again given the farmers some stimulus towards production.

Take red meat for example. The consumption of red meat has decreased slightly in the case of beef. The consumption decreased slightly, and while it was 26 kilograms per capita per annum ten years ago, it is now 25 kilograms per capita per annum. The consumption of mutton has decreased tremendously while the consumption of broilers had increased tremendously. In all these cases I am saying that if we had given the producer a price which encouraged and animated him and offered him an incentive to produce, we would not have had a meat shortage today. The hon. member is aware of the fact that we have gone out of our way specifically to obtain meat. We imported 5 000 tons of meat from Australia while importing nearly 5 000 carcases per week from neighbouring states. I gave the confidential information to the hon. member. This is all being done to augment our supplies so that we can have more meat available. We must have more meat available because we realize that meat is very expensive. How else can we do so? We can surely not subsidize the price of meat.

The hon. members must acknowledge that there is no method whereby meat prices could be subsidized. A moment ago I drew the attention of hon. members to salary adjustments. I am fairly happy that salary increases have kept pace with the increase in food product prices. I want to give hon. members the assurance that I am perturbed by many of these phenomena. The hon. member asks what is going to happen in future as far as dairy products are concerned. I can tell the hon. member that I am worried about that. I do not know whether our production can keep pace with the increase in our standard of living. With every salary increase the lower income groups develop more sophisticated eating habits. There are people in the lower income groups who go to the butcher after they have got their salary increases and say: “I want a first-grade beefsteak.” They even want to see the grade mark. My own wife asks only for “beefsteak”. Then we eat it as it comes—“left. right and centre”. With these improved standards of living, in connection with which considerable adjustments still have to be made for many of our non-Whites, we shall have to introduce sophisticated production much more rapidly. I cannot tell hon. members now what is going to happen to dairy products in the future. I am only very confident, as an optimist, that if we look after the producer and offer him a realistic price, we shall indeed be able to feed masses of people in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Agriculture has told us how he blindfolded nine housewives. I wonder whether it would not have been easier for us newcomers if we could rather have stood blindfolded while addressing this House for the first time. However, it is a great privilege to be in this House and I shall try to abuse that privilege.

Right at the outset I want to express my sincere thanks to my two immediate predecessors who used to represent my constituency. The one is the hon. member for Helderberg, at present the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs and of Tourism. The other is the hon. member for Tygervallei. I want to express my sincere thanks to them both for the work they have done in my constituency, and if there is any work that has not yet been disposed of, I should be pleased if they would do it as quickly as possible and then ask the voters to thank me for it!

In my constituency I have many elderly people, particularly in the Strand and Gordons Bay. I should like to dwell on this matter for a few moments. It is a fact that most of them are ladies, widows. Nevertheless, these elderly people in my constituency are all very valued members of society. They are the backbone of social life. This year, before 24 April, I found out once again that the political party which did not enjoy their support and aid did not have a chance of winning that constituency.

I received many inquiries during the election. These people fill in their registration forms and on them they state their occupations. They indicate that they are retired, emeritus, or whatever the case may be. When the voters’ roll was published, they came to check whether their names appeared on it, and what was their consternation when they saw that each of them had a nought against his name. Many of them asked me: “We already feel we are in the way. We are old and feel rejected. You state on the voters’ roll that we are noughts; really, we are not noughts yet.” I should like to ask whether the Department of the Interior could not perhaps be a little more considerate when the voters’ rolls are reviewed later on.

These elderly people, our aged, fall for the most part into three categories. The first category I want to mention comprises those people drawing old-age pensions. Through the years they have become accustomed to the idea that the State cares for all its children. In the past they learned that night was darkest just before the dawn. That is why they have not troubled me with requests and representations for their position to be reconsidered now that the cost of living and the rate of inflation are so high. They are calm and I think that this Government deserves thanks for making it possible for these old people to remain calm in the midst of rising costs and greater demands on their means, because they have learned that their situation is regularly reviewed and that they can rely on aid from the Government.

The other two categories have a great deal in common and their position is a more difficult one. I refer to those people who have to live on the interest on their investment—they comprise the first group. They have no control over the interest rates that are laid down. When interest rates drop, they feel powerless. Their continued existence and their standard of living are threatened. Especially if this takes place over a long period, it is particularly that group which are only just independent that becomes needy and even poverty-stricken. They are powerless because there is absolutely nothing they can do about the situation. The other group are the civil pensioners, such as retired teachers and Government employees. I also want to include here the retired Railway people. Judging from the appeals I have been receiving recently, they are apparently not as sure as are the old-age pensioners that their interests will be attended to just as regularly. They become panic-stricken. Their means become insufficient for their needs. They are not rich people, but are dependent on the pensions they receive. When the cost of living and inflation rise to such an extent that greater demands are made on them, these people begin to get worried.

I had a very respected friend who told me that he had to use some of his capital as well in order to stay alive. Then he calculated that he had sufficient funds to live to the age of 80 in that way. I met him again subsequently when he was 83 years old, and he was a very worried man. He had really begun to think that he was not going to die at all and would have nothing to live on later on. He only died at the age of 86.

These people, particularly those in the latter caregories, are powerless to do anything about their own situation, and they realize that when the shoe begins to pinch them, their standard of living will suffer. They find themselves in a situation of fear. Because they live alone, they usually bear this burden alone.

We who are young, we who in fact are fated sooner or later to take their place, are usually inclined to be very unsympathetic towards the elderly and lack a grasp of their problems. Fortunately the hon. the Minister of Finance was not so unapproachable. He met these people halfway. The increase in rates of interest greatly assisted this category and now, again, we have had these concessions which were made in respect of the other pensioners. That is why I want to convey on behalf of a great many of my constituents my very sincere thanks.

Mr. Speaker, there is another group of voters in my constituency who have identified themselves, and I should also like to say something about them. I am now referring to the farmers on the Cape Flats. There are a few hundred families farming there. They are people whose forefathers were recruited in Germany in 1876 to come and tame the dunes of the Cape Flats. They did an outstanding job of work. Today they are independent people. They are hardworking and have a rich culture. I may mention that the oldest farmers’ association in South Africa is to be found on these same Cape Flats; it was established as far back as 1885. This agricultural region only comprises about 26 square kilometres. In spite of this they provide 70% of the Peninsula’s fresh vegetables and, in addition, some of these farmers also deliver direct to ships passing by here. This is the vegetable larder of Greater Cape Town, and for that reason this region is of the greatest importance to us. It has sufficient water, it is good soil and it is situated on the threshold of the market so that no other producer can really provide the Cape market with vegetables quite as fresh as these people’s. Nor could they supply them at a more reasonable price than these people can, owing to the geographic location of this area.

There are two factors threatening the continued existence of these people. I really do not want to spend much time on the first one. This is a question of roads. They have already given up large areas of land for the widening of roads. They have also given up a number of farms in terms of group areas legislation. Where vegetable gardens existed previously, there are now large areas under non-White housing. The Cape Divisional Council is once again engaged in planning a major new road, a freeway—the so-called East-West freeway—right through the agricultural area. I want to give notice to the hon. the Minister of Planning and the hon. the Minister of Agriculture that I will be seeking their aid in preventing the construction of this road.

The factor I really want to deal with more fully is the ousting of these people by the enormous number of squatters we have on the Cape Flats. These farmers suffer so heavily from theft that many of them have already thrown up the sponge. Today there are broad expanses of what was once garden land and on which vegetables used to be grown, but which simply lie neglected today. This is the position because the farmers simply tell one: “We are not going to grow vegetables for thieves and criminals. They destroy our farmlands, they destroy our vegetables and it is not worth taking trouble and spending money under these circumstances.” In many cases it becomes uneconomic for these people to carry on their farming industry. I shall try to illustrate this.

There is one owner in this agricultural region who has about 180 squatters on his land. They pay him R8 per month rent just for the land they occupy. He provides them with no facilities, not even fresh water, let alone sanitary services. Thus he has an income from that industry of about R1 330 per month, which amounts to about R16 000 per annum. Usually these people do not give receipts to the squatters, and I take it, therefore, that he does not pay income tax on that amount either. The situation is such that these people cannot really be prosecuted because there is no proof that they are charging rent for the land occupied by the squatters. Nor can the squatters be removed because there is no alternative housing for them. Thus it is that within that small agricultural region of about 26 square kilometers, there are over 1 500 squatter families, who are really making it difficult for these people to continue producing sufficient fresh vegetables for the Cape Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, I could perhaps also mention to you that another grave danger of which we have recently become acutely aware there, is the question of pollution. The water table of the whole Cape Flats is very high. It is so high that the people there simply dig a hole in the ground, put a pump on it and irrigate the farmlands. Now it is understandable that if such enormous numbers of people are living there without sanitary services, the danger of pollution, particularly in that region, is a particularly grave one.

Mr. Speaker, in the region falling under the Divisional Council of the Cape there is at present a backlog of 55 000 houses for these people. The Divisional Council assures me that it will take them eleven years to meet this need. This means, therefore, that they will have to build houses at a rate of 5 000 per annum. In addition there is an annual population increase of 23 000 non-Whites in the region falling under the Divisional Council of the Cape, and a further 500 houses per annum are required to accommodate them. Sir, that is why it is not only the agricultural industry on the Cape Flats in my constituency which is being threatened; this is a problem encompassing far more than the interests of my farmers alone.

This squatting does not only occur in my constituency; in my constituency it does not only occur on the Flats either; squatting occurs at various points in my constituency, it also occurs all round the Peninsula and, in many cases within the Peninsula, too. We have a vicious circle here. When decent housing is provided for these people, that very factor which should be a solution to the problem acts as strenghened force of attraction which, in turn, attracts more people to these regions from the interior. This means that more jobs have to be provided; it means that more water has to be provided; it means that one’s infrastructure needs to be expanded and developed; in other words, the expense is continually growing.

Now, Sir, it is being held out to us as a prospect that Mitchell’s Plain, the future Coloured city of about a quarter of a million inhabitants, will be the solution to this great problem. I want to make the statement this afternoon that Mitchell’s Plain is going to be too expensive to accommodate people economically, and particularly subeconomically. I base this on what I have learnt from a survey made last year in an area known as Louw’s Bos at Elsies River. The Divisional Council had this survey by the University of Stellenbosch. That survey showed that the minimum living wage per family in that region was R86 per month. They also found that 48,5% of the people involved earned less than that; in other words, virtually 50% of these people are living below the breadline. They also found that the R3,50 per month rent now being paid by them for housing there was in fact, already too much, if one bears in mind what they earn. If we were to place them in subeconomic housing, it would cost them between R10 and R16 per month. These figures are also fully comparable with the situation among the squatters I am referring to. Thus I say that they will not be able to afford the rent at Mitchell’s Plain.

Sir, we have the proof of this in Hanover Park, a housing scheme by the Cape Town City Council where squatters are hauled out from the bush and properly housed, but it is being found that they are unable to afford the rent. After a month they are kicked out because they are unable to pay the rent; then, once again, one has squatting, and so the vicious circle goes on from morning to night. That is why I say, Sir, that I think that Mitchell’s Plain is going to be too expensive for the purpose for which it is being developed. It is not my intention this afternoon to plead that Mitchell’s Plain should not be developed at all. I want to plead that the Mitchell’s Plain should not be made as large as is envisaged in the present planning; that we should be satisfied with a smaller Mitchell’s plain in which it will in fact be possible to provide certain services and to accommodate a certain number of people, but I also want to plead that we should rather, at the same time, implement the necessary infrastructure and force of attraction at complexes such as Saldanha and Mamre, so that there may be a force of attraction not only to attract these people away from the over-populated Cape Peninsula, but also to attract those already living here to those parts.

But, Sir, these squatters, and particularly the work-shy ones among them, have become such a burden that our local authorities and also individuals are calling for a speedy solution to this problem. That is why I feel that a long-term policy alone will be unable to provide a satisfactory solution to this problem. Solutions will have to be sought on a short-terms basis, too, in order to improve conditions, not only to assist the farmers, but also for social and health reasons in particular. That is why I consider it necessary that there should be greater coordination among a whole series of Government departments which, in my opinion, are involved in this problem. I am not going to motivate this, but I think that the Departments of Community Department, Planning. Coloured Relations, Health, Labour, Transport, Justice and Police, at least, are all involved in dealing with this major problem. I want to state that this is a problem which has assumed extraordinary proportions and that it has become one of extraordinary gravity. For that reason extraordinary steps too, will be necessary to solve it.

I want to conclude with this one qualification I want to lay down. I want to stipulate this one condition. I do not think we should consume our energies in providing better housing or any better services for those people who prefer to be bad and who prefer to remain bad. In my opinion we should in any event not allow them to stay any longer among other people who are really striving and making an effort to improve their own position, because they not only set a poor example, but also give offence to those people.

Mr. Speaker, to me it is a special pleasure—and I am doing this in all sincereity—to congratulate the hon. member for False Bay and welcome him to this House. I envy him the fluency and the insight with which he discussed these matters relating to his constituency, and I should like to wish him a successful career in this House.

Sir, it is seldom that an individual is granted the privilege of becoming a member of an institution which is so directly involved in the historical conflicts of its own society as is the Parliament of South Africa. To me personally it was and is important to gain as much clarity as possible on the nature and the role of this institution, as well as the position in which any member of this House finds himself, irrespective of his party-political convictions. I noticed that a few maiden speeches were delivered to great effect in that the hon. members drew on their previous professional experience in order to deliver non-controversial analyses. By your leave, Sir, I should like to follow suit and, as a former sociologist with a special interest in political processes, make a few objective statements on what I regard as the paradox of White politics in South Africa.

This paradox cannot be laid at the door of any particular group or individual in our society, but must be seen particularly against the background of two salient features of our society, the socio-cultural composition of our population on the one hand, and the nature of parliamentary democracy as practised here on the other hand. Our socio-cultural position has already been analysed from various perspectives. We have the class model we have the colonial model, we have the purely racial analysis, and the model which is enjoying a fair measure of prominence at present is that of the plural society. Sir, knowledge of this approach emphasises the fact that the salient feature of a plural society is to be found in the fact that a plurality of races and / or ethnic groups exists within one social structure. At the same time the political and economic structures of that society are predominantly controlled by one race or ethnic group, and this feature is seen as a determining factor in the developmental problems and conflict situations of that society. Viewed in this way, South Africa is indeed an obvious example of a plural society. At the same time we have here a political institution which is known as parliamentary democracy, and as you know, Sir, the essential feature of this institution is that the governing party comes into power by having succeeded in gaining the majority support of the enfranchised voters in a general election. Consequently in the conventional democracies of Western Europe the governing party is responsible to the electorate exclusively. The core of the paradox of White politics in South Africa is to be found in the fact that any person who, with the aid of the entrenched democratic process, has succeeded in becoming a member of this House, has responsibilities which extend far beyond the mandate he has been given. Both the Government and the Opposition must react to demands and pressure which originate not only with the electorate, but also outside. In short, Parliament is functionally involved with the problems of both Black and White politics while being, from the nature of its composition, dependent solely on White politics. This fact places particular responsibilities on every member of this House. It confronts him, so it would seem to me, with certain basic dilemmas. I should very much like to mention a few of these dilemmas.

Firstly, there is the dilemma of choosing between the exploitation of short-term political gain and benefits at the cost of long-term political developments, a dilemma which the hon. member for Innesdal raised in a particularly striking manner in his maiden speech. Secondly, there is the dilemma of choosing between the reduction of White political pressure on the one hand, without giving rise to an increase in Black political pressure on the other hand. Thirdly, there is the dilemma of choosing between the formulation of rational, logical political solutions, and taking cognizance of the actual political emotions and trends of our country. This paradox, and the dilemmas connected therewith, is the lot of every member of this House. The awareness of this fact can clearly be seen in the manner in which the hon. the Minister of Finance struggled in his Budget with the desirability of stability and growth, and the skill with which he drew on Aesop in order to illustrate these points. The paradox and dilemmas can also be seen in the manner in which the Opposition reacted to this Budget.

Mr. Speaker, it is my wish that I, as the member for Rondebosch, shall endeavour in the best traditions of this House to make a bold stand against this paradox and the dilemmas connected therewith, and that I shall be open to welcome criticism, whenever it would appear that I am no longer aware of the delicate relationship between the mandate of my constituency, however limited it may be, and the much greater responsibilities I carry when I set foot in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Rondebosch on his first speech in this House, and on the interesting scientific analysis he gave us. My personal good wishes accompany him in his parliamentary career.

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to me to be able to make my first speech in this House today. You will allow me to say that it is a great honour to me to sit in this House and that it is a great honour to me to succeed the Honourable P. C. Pelser as M.P. for Klerksdorp. I want to pay tribute to him here for having represented the constituency of Klerksdorp with distinction for 21 years. I have pleasure in conveying the appreciation and thanks of the constituency for what he meant to the constituency of Klerksdorp, apart from the great task he performed on the national level as Minister of Justice. We in Klerksdorp will always be very grateful to him for this. At the same time I am proud of being able to represent the constituency of Klerksdorp and I am proud, too, of the constituency I represent. I should like to give the assurance that I shall always do my best to further its interests and to be a worthy member of this House.

I should like briefly to express a few thoughts on the question of citizenship in our country, especially in regard to certain responsibilities it entails. Citizenship is defined as the capacity of an individual in his relationship of authority with a particular State, in the sense that he may lay claim to certain rights in and protection by that State, in return for which he owes that State allegiance, loyalty and obedience. As an example of the rights I may mention a citizen’s right to vote, through which he enjoys the right and privilege of active participation in the national government. This imposes a responsibility and a duty upon the citizen which he must exercise with great prudence. The right and privilege of protection by the State is not very often remembered. This great security enjoyed by a citizen of a country in receiving comprehensive protection from the State is important. As a citizen of my country I am entitled to comprehensive protection by the State, provided that I remain in that relationship of authority with the State by actively observing my part of the relationship, by showing my allegiance and loyalty, and by exercising my civic freedom in a responsible manner.

One of the origins of civic freedom is the Calvinistic heritage of our republican past, and the greatest liberties of the citizen are based on the principle of separation between the State and forms of society unrelated to the State, such as the Church, the family, the university, etc. The State never interferes with the authority of a father in a healthy family. The State will only intercede in exceptional cases such as child neglect.

The oath of office taken by the State President requires him, inter alia, to obey, honour, uphold and maintain the Constitution and all other laws of the Republic, to ensure that justice is done to all and to devote himself to the well-being of his people. These other laws include our liberties and rights as citizens. Dr. Wessels states the matter as follows in his book on the Republican Constitution (translation):

It is precisely this greater measure of civic freedom which imposes a greater responsibility on us as citizens. It is easier for one to be negative, for then one does not have to do anything. I believe that one must always approach one’s responsibilities as a citizen by knowing, by realizing and by actively observing where one is. Briefly, and generally speaking, one must look at the country in which one lives, at the freedom one enjoys, at the means at one’s disposal, etc. Then one realizes that in fact one has much more than one would really be entitled to in terms of one’s own contribution. Then one has the responsibility, too, of responding to the demands made on one and thereby ensuring that one retains one’s civic liberties.

In this regard I want to indicate briefly, in the first place, my labour, which I must apply in my occupation to the best of my ability, knowing that this will enable me to make an essential contribution to my country’s development and progress, and to provide to the best of my ability for those entrusted to my care. If, as a citizen, I demand of the State that it ensure that its hire is worthy of the labourer, it is my responsibility as a citizen to ensure that my labour is worthy of the hire. I must perform my labour in such a way as to assist, inter alia, in combating the threat of rising costs and all that these entail.

In the second place it is my responsibility to foster and to help create citizens for my country, people who will be worthy citizens after me. I must help create a healthy new generation. While I as a citizen demand protection from the State against what is wrong, it remains my primary task to lay the foundation for the development of true citizens of my country.

In the third place it is my responsibility, not only to show myself prepared to protect my country, but to take positive action in this regard. I should not merely wait until I am called upon to do so. In the meantime I must arm myself with knowledge and insight so that I may be able to resist various onslaughts on the spirit. I must constantly resist all kinds of influences bent on undermining, weakening or alienating my loyalty to that which is my own, or on making me feel ashamed of my way of life. This requires one to take an active pride in that which is one’s own, as well as to contribute, not only to its preservation, but also to its further development.

In the fourth place a citizen has a great responsibility to orientate himself in respect of the situation of his country, the given realities. He must then control his heart and mind and exercise his civic freedom in such a way as not to play into the hands of the enemy nor to surrender his country to the enemy, nor even to create confusion.

All this requires me to show perseverance and zeal in working for the survival of my country; in fact, it requires me to exert myself in such a way as to improve what I have received. In the meantime I may certainly not mark time or postpone the devotion of my life to my country. I must not only live in such a way as to set an example to others, but also to inspire all around me to service and devotion. I must fight the good fight right now. I must remain in the race, and in anything I do I must preserve faith.

There are so many places and opportunities in all walks of life for being of service and for making a contribution. Fortunately there are many people in our country who are prepared to be of service outside their daily occupations as well. They are voluntarily prepared to contribute a great deal to their country and people. I should like, in all humility, to pay tribute to that many who are only too prepared to serve at all times. Without being forced to do so, they are prepared to render self-sacrificing ser vice without ever expecting to be honoured or rewarded for it, service rendered in allegiance and loyalty to their country. In our country this, too, is a great source of strength.

Our country needs all its citizens in every walk of life. Everyone has a positive contribution to make, so that we may not only preserve what we have, but may continue to receive what we need for our survival, so that those who come after us will inherit our freedom. It is important that one should always be prepared to die for one’s country, but surely it is equally or even more important that while one lives, one should live for one’s country and one should live in the time in which one lives.

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to me to congratulate the hon. member for Klerksdorp on his first speech. I want to express the hope that in the years to come he will render valuable service in the House.

For me as a newcomer, too, it is a very great honour and privilege to be a member of this House. I pray that in spite of my failings I, too, will be able to contribute to the development and progress of our beloved country, South Africa.

The constituency of Ladybrand has been represented for the past 19 years by Mr. H. C. A. Keyter, a man of few words, but someone who commanded respect wherever he went. He was an esteemed representative of his constituency. Everyone had respect for his opinion and especially for his knowledge of agriculture and of the maize industry in particular.

I should, like to introduce the House to my constituency as it appears today. The constituency is situated in the eastern Free State. It extends from Hobhouse in the south to Fouriesburg in the north-east, Senekal in the north-west, Bloemfontein in the west and back to Hobhouse with Lady-brand as principal town in the centre of the constituency. The constituency borders on the Black neighbouring state of Lesotho for approximately 176 kilometres, with the Caledon River serving as the border. Within the constituency we have a, Tswana homeland, Thaba Nchu, and Coloured area, Thaba Patchoa. I should like to state on this occasion that the relationship between the Whites in my constituency and the Black and Brown people of this neighbouring state and of the homelands is excellent, in spite of what is said. There are quite a few historical places in the constituency, and I should like to mention a few of them briefly, In addition I also want to mention some events. In the constituency are well-known Bushman rock paintings which have been preserved through the centuries. The Diarthrognatus, a world-famous fossilized protozoon, was found in a sandstone cliff at Ladybrand in 1933-’34. This fossil is generally accepted by scientists to be the link between reptiles and mammals. As such it is one of the most important fossils in the world. The original fossil is being preserved in the National Museum at Bloemfontein. Now I want to say that since then we have become civilized people. The period just before the arrival of the Voortrekkers was characterized by Chaka’s many wars. In 1833 the Barolong approached Moshesh, the Basuto chief, for land, and were given approximately 25 square miles. This occupies almost the whole district of Thaba Nchu. The Voortrekkers gathered at the present Thaba Nchu after they had left the Cape Province. Several battles in the district followed, namely the battle of Viervoet and the battle of Berea. During the Basuto Wars great men achieved undying fame, men such as Louw Wepener and Cmdt.-Genl. Fick.

An interesting piece of history is that Cmdt. A. P. J. Diederichs, the grandfather of our present Minister of Finance, was a well-known field-cornet of Ladybrand for many years. He played a leading role on the Basutoland border. In this way he warned Pres. Brand that there was imminent danger of a civil war among the Barolong at Thaba Nchu, and that the Basuto, too, would try to take part in this. Field-cornet Diederichs was reprimanded by the President for allegedly causing the people unnecessary anxiety. A short while later, when he was standing with the President at the smouldering kraal of Chief Maroko, the President told him: “Diederichs, if we had listened to you this would not have happened.” Now hon. members may understand why we would do well to listen when the hon. the Minister of Finance rises today.

The constituency of Ladybrand is endowed with great scenic beauty, which up to now has not been fully appreciated and which may be compared with the Garden Route in, the Cape Province. I am referring to the route from Aliwal North in the south all along the eastern border of the Free State up to the Golden Gate Highlands Park in the north-east: This part of my constituency would benefit greatly, if the Department of Tourism would give attention to possible ways of promoting this industry in that part of the country.

The constituency is primarily an agricultural area in which farming in general is practised. The principal sources of income are wheat, maize, fruit, dairy products and livestock. I should like to mention to hon. members the following production figures for the past 12 months. The wheat production amounted to 1 354 000 metric tons, while 118 000 metric tons of maize, 3 874 000 kg of cheese and 2 376 000 kg of butter were produced. Thousands of boxes of cherries are exported every year. This could only be achieved with the aid of a small experimental farm at Ficksburg which grows virus-free trees and which also provides the root-stocks on which cherry trees are grafted. I should also like to mention to hon. members the livestock figures as published in the stock inspectors’ report for 1968. I may just mention that these figures have remained substantially the same. There were 3 000 head of cattle and 852 000 sheep. The proportion of grazing land to land for crop farming in this area is 60% to 40%. The constituency is very proud of its production figures. It is clear that the constituency makes an important contribution to the national income and the food supply of the inhabitants of this country. Wheat and maize have been handled and stored in bulk for the past few years, thanks to financial aid from the Government, as well as to the fact that the Government agreed to the erection of grain-elevators at various points in the constituency. These elevators contribute greatly to the rapid intake of wheat and to the saving of fuel.

I also want to express my sincere thanks to the Government for the excellent research undertaken on the experimental farm at Bethlehem in connection with wheat and maize. This contributes greatly to the success which is being achieved in this field. Mr. Speaker, you will notice that the proportion between grazing land and land for crop farming is 60% to 40% This makes me wonder whether more attention should not be given in this field to research concerning stock-feeding, stock-diseases, and the conversion of poor soil into pasture, because we have a great shortage of red meat in our country.

I want to ask that the Department of Agriculture should conduct an inquiry to see whether or not there is a need for an experimental farm for livestock in this area. In conclusion I should like to draw your attention to the fact that there is an agricultural high school at Tweespruit where excellent work is being done in training future young farmers. The size of this farm is 1 180 ha and I believe that on this property, which already belongs to the State, this need could be met at minimum expense. If this property could be used as an experimental farm on a large scale, it could serve the Free State region as well as the Highveld region.

Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege for me to congratulate the hon. member for Ladybrand on making his maiden speech in this House today. He spoke with knowledge about his constituency and I am sure that he will be a great credit to his constituents. I wish him an enjoyable and fruitful sojourn in this House.

It is my privilege to represent East London City, a city which is now very much in the news due to the tragedy of the grounding of the S.A. Oranjeland. I should like at this stage to pay tribute to the officials of the Department of Transport who have kept me informed daily in regard to the question of pollution in that area. I should also like to pay tribute to them for the manner in which they have lent assistance in that area within the limits available to them. I should also like to pay tribute to the local authorities there for the magnificent way in which they have reacted to the challenge which the pollution has brought about and I want to repeat the assurances of the mayor of East London that, provided no further pollution takes place, the city’s beaches will be as sparkling and as sunny over Christmas as they have always been in the past. I hope to represent the views and desires of the people of East London and generally to make a contribution here to the benefit of the country as a whole.

In his Budget address, the hon. the Minister of Finance stated that he aimed to promote economic growth and stability and to strengthen the balance of payments. He allocated R17 million to be used for low-interest loans through the Industrial Development Corporation by establishing a new productive capacity for exports. It is in respect of this latter item that I particularly wish to address this House. The mouth of the Buffalo River was declared the port of East London in 1847. Since that year East London has developed predominantly as a service city and port with metropolitan functions in regard to the considerable area that lay around it. Dramatic changes have, however, taken place in the function of East London since the implementation by this Government of its policy of separate independent states. Two of these states cover the bulk of the area surrounding East London and as a result of the present delineation of the boundaries as we know them the area of the East London-Berlin-King William’s Town complex has become virtually surrounded by Black homelands and has in fact formed a small peninsula which is linked to the rest of South Africa by a narrow neck along the road and rail links. In furtherance of Government policy the Blacks who formerly were resident in the Bantu homelands surrounding East London were endorsed back into that area and, as a result of this movement, the necessity arose for the creation of work opportunities. More important still, due to the gradual change in the background of the Bantu there, particularly as regards their sociological habits, whereas previously they were primarily a pastoral and nomadic group of people, they are now at an increasingly faster rate becoming a settled urban commercially and industrially orientated people. The rate and the pace of change continues to accelerate. What we may perhaps have accepted in 1961 appears now to have been underestimated. Coupled with these two factors, namely the movement of the Bantu back into this area and the change in their hopes and aspirations, is the real existence today of what we know as a population explosion. These three factors have created in East London a situation which requires the immediate and urgent attention of the Government. A vast pool of labour is building up there and although I know it is not necessary to quote figures to hon. members here, I think that it is worthwhile repeating what is actually happening. There are 1,7 million Blacks in the Transkei and, 5 million in the Ciskei and the two together form the largest group as a Bantu homeland in the whole of South Africa. There are 104 000 Blacks resident in the town of Mdantsane, which is approximately equidistant from East London and King William’s Town. There are also 90000 Blacks in Zwelitsha which, as a matter of interest, in the Xhosa language means “new world”, and 31 000 Blacks in East London City itself. These figures relate to 1970 and one can of course accept the fact that they have increased considerably over the past few years. It is also a curious geographic fact that if one looks at the boundary of the Ciskei homeland one finds that the major towns there are predominantly on the boundary, namely, Mdantsane, Zwelitsha and Alice, whereas the other towns which are Peddie and Middle-drift are apparently relatively unacceptable for development along the same lines as Butterworth and Umtata in the Transkei. It seems logical therefore that in order to offer labour opportunities to the Blacks there, the industrial development should be directed at the industrial development of Berlin, the East London-King William’s Town-complex. I am referring to the little peninsula about which I have been talking. This is the area which in fact lies outside the Bantu homelands but adjacent to them. If this is so, and I believe that it cannot be contradicted, then I would appeal to the Government to set up for this area a body as similarly orientated as the XDC which is operating so successfully in the Transkei. Perhaps this body could consist of an extension of the IDC with responsibility solely directed towards the industrial development of this small peninsula. I believe that there is a real need for a permanent well-officered body to sell this area for development. The municipality of East London has already taken very real steps in creating an infrastructure there. I believe also, Mr. Speaker, that the Government Conceded that this area deserved special attention when it recently granted concessions to new industries in this particular area—a 40% rail rebate on finished goods and a 25 % rebate on harbour dues in respect of goods manufactured in the area and shipped ex East London to other South African ports. Unfortunately the present indications are that these concessions do not appear to have gone far enough. We would have expected perhaps better benefits, but obviously new channels, new functions, are required in order to entice the entrepreneur to that particular area. I would like to suggest a few more incentives. Sir. I believe that these incentives should be offered, first of all, to the first ten major industries that settle in the area. Firstly, I would recommend that in respect of new industries we should relax the provisions of the Road Transportation Act to enable the industries to use their own transport for the transportation of finished goods and raw materials; secondly, that we should extend the railage rebate to include items such as coal and raw materials for use in the industrial processes in respect of inward-coming traffic; thirdly, that we should extend the period during which tax concessions will apply and, fourthly, that we should establish in the East London area a college for advanced technical education for Whites and in the region a technical training college for Blacks. Mr. Speaker, I believe that drastic action should be taken here because there are certain factors which are operating against the opportunities or the desires of entrepreneurs to come to this particular area, and one of them, unfortunately, to be quite frank, is the reluctance of the White executives and administrative personnel to move from the Reef down to East London. Sir, East London is the main maize export port of the Republic and presently it is a major wool export port and should be kept as such, for to take away the right of East London to export wool would create the reverse of what is aimed at.

Mr. Speaker, I come now to what I set out mainly to do in this speech, and that is to suggest ways and means to encourage exports as referred to by the hon. the Minister, apart from those which I have just pleaded for. I believe that a further incentive to the two necessities of drawing industries to the area and the use of labour potential would be for an examination by Government in depth as soon as possible of the feasibility of establishing in the East London area a free trade zone. It is sometimes called an export processing zone, and I want to make it quite clear here that I am not referring to a free port, which is a completely different concept. The commission of inquiry into export trade, that is to say, the Reynders Commission, completed its work on 8 July 1972 and I believe the report was tabled in Parliament in 1973, and in chapter 9, paragraph 147 of the report, the commissioners referred to this concept. Let me just shortly read out what they said. They said—

The commission referred to export processing zones. Sir, this is a narrow description of what I have just mentioned as a free trade zone, because I believe that an export processing zone could be used both ways, namely for export purposes and also for import purposes. It is not a new concept altogether, Mr. Speaker. There are 26 countries in the world today—four in Africa—which have free trade zones. Generally it is situated near an airport or a port itself, it becomes an enclosed policed area, and it is considered for customs purposes as being outside the country itself. I might mention that there is no relaxation or alteration of the customs tariff policy. The zone could be operated by Government agencies or by private enterprise, and they should possibly be subsidized by the Government. There should be postal, telephone and telegraphic services with international links, road and rail terminals, administration accommodation, warehousing and facilities for the operation of freight, and factory space. This area naturally would be labour-intensive, as suggested in the Reynders Commission, and among many of its assets to exporters are the following: There will be financial benefits in that funds are not tied up in customs dues, while the merchandise is being held in the zone. There will be simplicity in that goods may be held there for various forms of processing for an unlimited period, for processing such as drying, sorting, grading, cleaning, packing and mixing. There would be relief to the Railway authorities, who are frequently under pressure to deliver export goods to ports. There would be on-the-spot manufacture for export purposes and a variety of other advantages. I should like to suggest. Sir, that the East London area is ideally situated for the establishment of this particular type of free trade zone. There is land available. There is the necessary labour. The area has been designated as a growth point. There is an under-used port; and my information is that during the 1973-’74 year the East London port facilities were operated so far as commercial berth occupancy was concerned at the rate of 46,49%. This is, I would like to suggest, the most natural and the most logical place for the establishment of this free trade zone. I am making this plea not only on behalf of the people of East London, but it has also the backing of the Border Regional Development Committee and the Border Chambers of Industry and Commerce.

In conclusion, I would like to say that at the moment in South Africa the spotlight is shining on the homelands, and from the point of view of the rest of the world those who are interested in South Africa also have a spotlight shining on the homelands. I would ask that the Government now focus this spotlight on this small peninsula where there are large numbers of eager Black workers looking for work opportunities and for a place in the sun.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to congratulate the hon. member for East London City on the excellent and very interesting maiden speech which he has just delivered. We look forward to his further contributions in this Debating Chamber, and I wish him well in making them.

*Sir, since I came to this House as newcomer, one thing in the various debates has been extremely gratifying, and that was the tremendous esteem and respect in which our courts are also held in this highest Debating Chamber in our country. This esteem and respect for our courts and our Bench, from the inferior courts right through to the highest court in our country, is something which exists not only here, but also among the general public. This is a fact upon which we can look back, and of which we can take cognizance with much gratitude. We in South Africa are indeed proud of our Bench. The independence, impartiality and standard of our Bench, has undoubtedly made a tremendous contribution to the order and stability which we are enjoying in our fatherland. That is why I want to pay tribute today to these men, yes, a long line of them, who have over the years graced our Bench, these people who not only endowed the office with prestige, but who also, in doing so, conferred honour upon South Africa’s name abroad. In the process the profession from which our judges are drawn reaped great honour and dignity. At the same time our judges, through their actions and their standard, placed a great responsibility on the legal profession, for the standard set by the Bench is also expected of the legal practitioner. Today high ethical code is demanded by the Bar as well as the Side Bar of its members throughout South Africa. This is the case, Mr. Speaker, because the legal profession has a great and glorious tradition behind it, a tradition which came into being and developed over many centuries into what it is today. May I, in this context, remind hon. members of the by now classical foreword written by the late Mr. Justice R. P. B. Davis to A Handbook of Superior Court Practice by Herbstein and Diemont. With that foreword he made a brilliant contribution towards emphasizing the prestige and status of this profession, the legal profession. Inter alia, he wrote—

and then he went on to recall a long line of men who had served on our Bench, and he posed the question: If one looks back over their period of service on the Bench of South Africa, by what, as a result of what qualities, would one remember these men? And then he put it in these terms—

Further on in this brilliant foreword Mr. Justice Davis writes—

Mr. Speaker, it is this integrity which has been pursued regardless of consequences which has given our Bench the reputation which it bears with pride. This integrity to which Mr. Justice Davis referred, is only achieved by dint of hard and honest work. Only he who works hard, who leaves no stone unturned in order to produce only the best, it is only he who gets to the top. When he is there, he works just as hard. I can state without fear of contradiction in this Debating Chamber today: Our judges in South Africa work hard. The proverbial midnight oil is more than frequently their lot. This applies from the highest judicial office in South Africa down to the most junior judge. It is hard work requiring long hours because they have to work their way through bulky charters. They have to do a great deal of research, they have to evaluate evidence and legal points, give serious thought to the correct legal application and experience the tension of ensuring that justice is done to the individual in particular and the community in general. Then, too, there is the drawing up of decisions which follows. Our judges have in this sphere established a standard which compares with the best anywhere in the world. That is why I gladly pay tribute to these men on this occasion. It is not the office of judge which has given this office the status, prestige and esteem attendant upon it. It is the men who held that office who through their precept, their thoughtfulness, their integrity and their nobility of character, bestowed such status on that office.

Having said all this now, the saying that behind every successful man there is a woman cannot but enter your mind. This brings me to my actual theme this afternoon, viz. that on this the first opportunity which I have in this Debating Chamber I want to break a lance for a very small group of noble women, the widows of judges in South Africa.

It is these women who have stood by their husbands through everything, who shared their sacrifices when the midnight oil was being burnt, who stood by them in their office and who throughout their long careers, or even if they were only brief careers, were a support and comfort to them. I should now like to request the attention of hon. members for a consideration of the position of the pensions of judges’ widows.

Until 1956 no provision was made in South Africa for the payment of a pension to the widow of a judge. In that year legislation was introduced, which was subsequently repeated in 1959 by way of consolidated legislation, in terms of which a judge while he was serving made a contribution of R8 per month in respect of a widow’s pension. This provided that upon the death of a judge his widow would be entitled to a pension of R600 per annum, plus R60 for every completed year of his pensionable service, with a maximum of R1 200 per annum. That Act was subsequently amended in 1965. Then the contribution by a judge was increased from R8 to R12 per month while the pension of his widow became R900 per annum, plus R90 for every year of service which he rendered, with a maximum of R1 800. Those widows who were already receiving a pension in terms of the 1956 and 1959 Acts were, however, pegged to that pension as it was when they joined the pension fund. In 1970 another statutory amendment was effected by substituting section 13(1) of the original Act. In terms of that amendment the judge’s contribution rose from R12 to R18 a month while his widow’s pension became R1 350 per annum, plus R135 for every year of pensionable service up to a maximum of R2 700 per annum. The last amendment of the Act was in 1972. Then a judge’s contributions rose from R18 to R27 per month while the minimum pension to widows became R2 025, with an increase of R202.50 for every year of service that that judge had rendered. At present the maximum which such a widow may receive is R4 050 per annum.

At present there are only 24 of these women in South Africa who are receiving pensions. One of them is receiving a pension in terms of Act No. 44 of 1956, and she receives R100 per month, that is the maximum which she may receive in terms of that Act. She subsequently petitioned Parliament and her pension was then increased by R30 per month so that she is now receiving R130 per month. The next category is composed of those who joined under the same conditions in terms of Act No. 73 of 1959. In that category there are 13 widows, and their pensions vary from R70 per month to R100 per month, which is the maximum. The average pension of these 13 widows is R90,96 per month. Two of them petitioned Parliament and their pensions were also increased by R30 per month. Thus there are 14 of the 24 widows who are receiving a pension of between R70 and R130 per month. Next, there is the third category, and this is composed of those who joined under the R12 per month scheme, when the maximum pension became R150 per month. There are six widows in this category. The one who receives the least, is receiving R90 per month, while the one who receives the most, is receiving the maximum of R150 per month. The average pension of these six widows amounts to R130 per month. There is not a single widow in the fourth category, which was established when the maximum was increased to R2 700. The last category was established in terms of the latest legislation, and in that category there are four widows. All four are receiving the present maximum, viz. R337,50 per month.

I do not want to make any suggestion in this House as to what the pension ought to be. I can only give an indication of how I view this matter, and what my thoughts on this matter are. A judge’s pension is calculated at 20% of his salary, plus 4% for every year of service exceeding five years, but he only becomes entitled to a pension when he has been in service for ten years. The maximum pension he may earn amounts to 80% of his salary on the date of retirement, but he may only receive this after 20 years’ service. I want to advocate that the hon. the Minister of Justice review this entire matter. I should like to see the maximum period of 20 years within which a judge may earn his maximum pension shortened to 15 years. I think that very few of them ever reach the maximum, and if a person should in fact do so, he is already 70 years old when he has to retire. He does not in any case have much time left in which to enjoy his pension.

A judge who is today receiving the maximum pension he may receive in terms of the present salary, receives R1 050 per month. If that judge should die today his widow will the next day receive R337,50. She will receive one-third of what he received. I know one cannot always draw comparisons, but if one were to compare this with the benefits payable in terms of the Parliamentary Service and Administrators’ Pensions Act, it will be found that the ratio is quite different, viz. that a widow is entitled to three-quarters of the pension to which her husband would have been entitled. I think this is far more realistic and much fairer.

I have occupied the time of the House on behalf of a small group of people whom I have termed noble women. At present there are 24 of them, and there will be more of them in future. I believe that these women contributed their share towards South Africa and towards the Bench in a way of which we may be proud, and that we on our part could also demonstrate our gratitude by assessing their worldly needs on a just and accurate basis.

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I congratulate the hon. member for Koedoespoort on his maiden speech in this House. That hon. member and I were together for many years in the Transvaal Provincial Council. He quoted the judge who said that a judge should be a gentleman, but should also know a little law. As the judge said, I want to say to hon. members that I pick my friends, and they must be gentlemen, but they should also know a little law. This hon. member meets that requirement which I set for all my friends. Today this hon. member has made a speech in the striking style of a legal man. I believe that he is going to make his mark in this House.

I think it is pleasant for any hon. member to participate in a Budget debate, particularly when the Budget has been drawn up and delivered in a masterly fashion. Recently the Budget has shown us that it is like a big pantry. Surely hon. members still remember the pantry in an old farmhouse. Here and there a field-mouse would come and nibble at the contents of the pantry, but that pantry and its contents remained unaffected by this. In the past we have had only one kind of Budget from the hon. the Minister, a Budget which satisfied the needs of South Africa a Budget which was never a shock Budget. The Budget shock fever never prevailed among those who had to draw up budgets for their own firms. With the ability of a person who knows psychology and business psychology in particular, the hon. the Minister introduced his Budgets smoothly so that the businessman knew that his future, with what was coming, would be a good one and that he could reconcile himself to it. That is why we see that the businessman in South Africa today is not committing himself to any great extent on the Budget which is being presented in this House. They are discussing it, but the true businessman is not criticizing it.

I listened attentively to the various speeches made by hon. members. It is true that the man in the street has a difficult task, and it is true that it is very difficult to come out on one’s budget in one’s own home, but the women of South Africa have always been able to cope with any task entrusted to them. The women of South Africa have tackled this problem of inflation with skill, and have shown the ability to distinguish between what is necessary and what not. They have adjusted themselves to the new circumstances, and they have helped and are still helping to combat inflation. Whether the women of South Africa are called upon to play their part in trekking over the Drakensberg Mountains, or whether the women of South Africa are asked to help combat inflation, they have borne their side of the yoke. They are always prepared to give to South Africa first, and to give of their best. I have every confidence that the women in South Africa, with their ability to adapt to the circumstances in our country, where necessary, will avert greater inflation and curtail its spread.

We have heard about the pensioners. I believe that the inflation factor causes an erosion of monetary values. This is definitely the case. However, the problem is that what the Government is giving the pensioner is being taken away by the local authorities with their budgets which are increasing all the time. Take, for example, the house of the pensioner. I represent a constituency which includes Crosby, Mayfair West and other areas in which many pensioners are living. These are people who devoted their lives to the Railways and who kept the wheels of South Africa turning. But what happens is that a person who is already 70 years old—and the Government has made good adjustments for him—is this year paying out R160 in rates on his land. I can mention his name here. His name is J. D. Scholtz. He is at present living in the constituency of the hon. member for Rosettenville. Over the past three years the rates on his land have amounted to R160. Now the city council has sent an urban assessor who valued this unit at R34 000, although the person’s property has not changed in any way between yesterday and today. This brings the amount which this pensioner has to pay up to a total of R648 per annum. This is the local authority of Johannesburg. In Crosby there was an 80% increase. They are with their rates—not State taxes—driving the pensioner from his home. What the hon. the Minister is able to give with the one hand, they are, on the other hand, taking away.

With both hands.

Yes, the hon. the Minister is giving with both hands. In respect of bus transportation there was an increase of 30%, and one is not certain whether it will not be increased again next month. The cost of garbage removal has increased by 25%, and once again one is not certain whether it will not increase again next month. One lives from day to day with a sword hanging over one’s head. This is the kind of thing which is happening. In respect of electricity there was a 20% increase. Hon. members can look into this matter in their constituencies, and they will see for themselves whether this is or is not happening. Mr. Speaker, the Budget which has been introduced here is to the good of each member of our population, but local authorities should be more skilful. They should not think that they have to build up their total income in respect of their budgets by means of rates only.

There are also our financial institutions which are of course able to render tremendous assistance to our country. I want to deal with the Stock Exchange today. I just want to indicate to hon. members the increases and the turnover on the Stock Exchange in the year 1969 alone.

In January of that year it was R165 million, in February R300 million, in March R184 million, in April R307 million, in May R338 million, and in June R217 million. This gives a total of R1411 million in the first six months. Such an institution is in fact a pulse; it is a movement, a living mechanism. It is just like fishing—you feel it in your bones when there are bears about, short sales—you feel it all over. In most cases, however, the fish throws the hook before it can be landed. I do not want to criticize the working of the Exchange. We do not want to criticize anyone there. I think that would be quite wrong. However, one would ask our institutions to be careful. Recently we had a young man by the name of Chweidan, who visited the Exchange. They said of that young man that he did not have the mental ability to pass standard VII. Nevertheless he accumulated R42 million for himself and the three people who were his associates, and channelled this to their own bank accounts. He did this over a period of only four months. In four months Chweidan built up for himself an account of R32 million at one bank in Benoni, the Whitfield Bank in Benoni. These accounts were “payee only”, “account payee only”; All of the cheques were not even signed and things of this kind. In this regard that branch of the bank erred to a large extent. Ben Temkin—many hon. members will possibly know him—wrote as follows in this regard—

He went further to say that we should take care that this kind of situation does not drive people away from the Exchange. How easily do people not become afraid of an exchange! On every level of life there are rogues, and on every level of life there are those people who drive one away from where one’s real welfare lies. Mr. Speaker, I have never met an Afrikaner man who would not like to become chairman of the FAK. I should very much like to be chairman of the Exchange. There are certain advantages attached to our people learning to know more about the Exchange. This is the place where the monthly turnover is in millions of rands. It should be possible for one to skim off a little cream there too. We should become skilful and we should examine the reports. That is why I say that our Exchange today is standing at a very high level. We agree that this is primarily owing to the gold position. Other exchanges, Wall Street and others, are dropping rapidly. I am asking these institutions to keep a very close watch on the actions of their officials, the people who work with them so that we will not have another case such as that of Chweidan and Poplak. On the Exchange you are told: History is ancient when the future is good. I believe that our future is very good.

Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Langlaagte on his maiden speech. As it happens, we know each other for a long time. I heard him say that he would like to become chairman of the Exchange. I can tell him that he can become vice-chairman at most; we shall discuss outside who will become chairman. I should like to wish the hon. member a very happy stay in this House.

Mr. Speaker, may I as a humble newcomer, also congratulate you on your appointment to the high office you hold. I shall try at all times, as other members do, to assist you to the best of my ability in the performance of your great task. I should like to express my appreciation to all my colleagues in this House and to all the officials for the manner in which they have welcomed me here as a new-comer. The courtesy and the friendliness I have been shown over the past few weeks is of such magnitude that I should say that it is going to be difficult to get rid of me if I am going to enjoy such friendliness and such courtesy at all times. I am aware of the fact that many great South Africans have left deep imprints in this House. They are still held in high repute in the history of our country and our descendants will always owe them a debt of gratitude. Of course, many members who also served here, have been forgotten with the passing of time. I am convinced that every member who comes to this House at this stage in our country’s history, tries to make his contribution to the best of his ability, and consequently I, too, shall try to make a small contribution.

†Mr. Speaker, it is significant that this House of Assembly is situated in the province of the Cape of Good Hope, because hope is what the people of South Africa of all races are entitled to. Our young people and our old people all have the same hopes. They hope that we here will lay foundations, solid foundations, for present generations and future generations to build, in happiness, in peace, in harmony and in prosperity. All of us, Sir, know that South Africa is a wealthy country, a very wealthy country. We have gold and diamonds and many other minerals, but I believe that our wealth does not lie in our mining industry; our wealth lies in the quality of all South Africans of all races. South Africans have the will to live and the will to work to make the Republic of South Africa one of the greatest countries in the Western democratic world. I come from the city of Port Elizabeth, often referred to as the Detroit of South Africa. It has the infrastructure and it has the natural resources, if we are allowed to diversify, to become a far greater force in the economy of South Africa than it has been up to now. Port Elizabeth and its environs have the makings of a second Witwatersrand complex, and with due respect to my hon. friends from the Witwatersrand I want to say that I am not proposing a takeover deal now. But, Sir, for us to realize this potential, we have got to get some Government assistance. The Port Elizabeth people and many people beyond the boundaries of Port Elizabeth hope that the St. Croix off-shore off-loader will become a reality. I naturally hope that the hon. the Minister of Transport and other members of the Cabinet will ensure that this plea of mine here this afternoon will not fall on deaf ears. I notice, Sir, that one hon. Minister is looking slightly perturbed. I can assure him that this is a maiden speech that is going to be non-controversial.

*Sir, I regard Saldanha as an accomplished fact, and consequently my speech this afternoon will not be contentious.

†Saldanha is an accomplished fact and as such this is a non-controversial measure. I am one of those people who has sufficient faith in the future of my country to believe that both Saldanha and St. Croix must be developed. I think that to develop both would be an act of vision, an act of faith and an act of confidence in the future and in the economy of the Republic of South Africa. It would be an economically sound decision, and I would like to deal with some of the many merits of St. Croix. Firstly, a St. Croix ore berth can be built quickly and at very small cost. It involves the contruction of a bridge-work from the shore to St. Croix island in Algoa Bay. The ore will flow on a conveyor belt to large ore carriers lying fast at a special loading zone. The promotors of the St. Croix project at one stage told us that they had orders from the Japanese steel mills totalling something like R580 million. Mr. Speaker, I presume that these orders were dependent upon the St Croix project going ahead by a certain date and that in the circumstances these orders must have lapsed, but I have no doubt that these orders could be re-negotiated once again. There will be improved railway revenue, because the Sishen-Port Elizabeth line has additional spare capacity. The St. Croix project will assist the South African Railways by increasing their revenue by the use of this spare capacity. The restrictions of the Port Elizabeth harbour limit the size of carriers and oil tankers to under 50 000 metric tons. The St. Croix project will be able to accommodate vessels up to 350 000 tons, thereby reducing freight charges to other countries and enabling South African ore to compete on international markets. Manganese is exported in smaller ships and the demand for the higher quality South African manganese is growing all the time. The removal of the iron ore exports from the present Port Elizabeth harbour will provide the additional space needed for the increased manganese exports. If one has a regard to the future and to the additional tonnage of traffic which will pass through Port Elizabeth harbour, one will realize that this congestion can be relieved by the removal of the iron ore exports to the St. Croix project. The export of conventional cargo will be thus facilitated as well. An established and efficient Port Elizabeth harbour, when coupled with St. Croix, will place Algoa Bay firmly on the map in so far as international shipping routes are concerned. Passing oil tankers and ore carriers will be bunkered and revictualled to the benefit of the local economy. The continuous flow of ore carriers also means a constant demand for engineering services to effect repairs. Algoa Bay could become one of the most prolific repair yards in the Republic of South Africa. The Eastern Cape needs St. Croix very desperately. The project could bring about a far greater diversification of industry. We are grateful to the motor industry.

But, Sir, can it be healthy for a city like Port Elizabeth to be so very dependent on the motor industry. The motor industry I believe, accounts for nearly half of our industrial activity. In view of the possible future difficulties in relation to the motor industry, it is essential that Port Elizabeth be revitalized by this diversification. There are certain distinct advantages in relation to the removal of the present Port Elizabeth ore berth. The ore berth borders immediately on King’s Beach and other beaches. These are premier beaches and they are crowded by thousands of holiday-makers during the season. The people who live in the vicinity are desperately upset that the ore dust fouls their household contents and the buildings. If the ore dumps were removed, this particular problem would also be eliminated. Lower South End is owned by the Department of Community Development and that department intends spending millions of rand on this particular area. This area will lie in ruins and it will lie undeveloped for as long as the ore dust problem exists.

The noise of the grinding of the mechanical grabs and conveyors loading ore at night into the ore carriers resounds in the immediate area. The removal of the ore berth would eliminate that problem as well. The beach area cannot be truly beautified and it cannot become a really premier holiday resort as long as the ore dust pervades it. With the ore berth removed to St. Croix, the Port Elizabeth ore berth could then be converted to handle containerized traffic. A large number of crated vehicle components enters Port Elizabeth every year. In time it is hoped that this stream will be reversed and that the South African components will go out as exports to the world from the motor establishments in the Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage areas. The oil tank farm could be removed from its position next to the ore berth in Port Elizabeth harbour to the new St. Croix development. These tanks already occupy a considerable amount of space and they constitute a safety hazard in that they are very near to the built-up section of the city.

It has been stated that international oil companies are interested in developing an export orientated petrol refinery at Port Elizabeth in conjunction with the St. Croix ore berth. If the development of a petrochemical complex would follow, it would mean an investment of approximately R400 million. Undoubtedly, political and economic developments in the Arab world, with threats of the expropriation of refineries and rights, would cause international oil companies to seek a base in an area where there is political stability. Port Elizabeth on the Cape route is a half-way site from which the petrochemical products can be distributed to any portion of the world because it is situated in a most convenient place. A nucleus for a petrochemical industry already exists in Port Elizabeth in the form of a carbon black factory. This factory uses a lot of heavy imported oil for products for the South African tyre industry. Within the next few years we shall have to develop every single port possibility along the South African coast.

I do not wish to go into this at length, but I need only refer to the problems which we have on our borders, the problems in Portugal and Rhodesia, for us to realize that it is a matter of extreme urgency that we develop every port possibility immediately. Those who believe that South Africa cannot afford both these ports, are thinking of South Africa in the short term. I believe that we should plan for South Africa in the long term. We cannot continue to rely on gold exports; we shall have to develop our other export trade to a far greater extent. We must concentrate on all our exports and develop them to the full. To do this we must ensure that our harbour facilities do not lag behind in any way whatsoever.

I understand that the construction time for the iron ore berth at St. Croix is approximately 2½ years. We were told that if the terminal would have come into operation by 1975 we should have earned an additional R387 million by 1980, in additional foreign earnings. Owing to the demand for non-polluting ore South African iron and manganese exports could exceed 40 million tons per annum by the year 1990, if an early start is made. Traffic on this scale, together with pig-iron, steel and coal, makes it essential for us to have two ports. Furthermore, the availability of two ports makes it much easier for us to operate when there is port congestion or when we encounter such problems as are existing at present. As the development of St. Croix at this stage is clearly in the national interest it should be owned and operated by the South African Railways.

The S.A. Railways is not subject to taxation and may consider operating the terminal at cost, until the capital has been redeemed. Thereafter it should be an attractive and profitable proposition. The capital cost was at one stage estimated at R47 million and I believe it has now escalated to R60 million. The Railways will earn enormous additional transportation revenue from St. Croix and it will make an invaluable contribution towards South Africa’s balance of payments. The development of iron and manganese exports would be a major generator of foreign earnings. Should the Railways decide that they do not wish to lay out the R60 million. I am sure they would be able to negotiate with the private sector, because it was the private sector, in the first instance, which was prepared to put up the capital for St. Croix.

I want to appeal to the hon. the Minister of Transport and the other hon. members of the Cabinet, to consider giving Port Elizabeth this industrial injection it so badly needs, so that this city can play its part in the economy of South Africa. I believe that industrial stagnation of any form whatever in any area can lead to the greatest difficulties that we can foresee in this country. It would be a bold, wise and courageous step if the hon. the Minister of Transport and the Government authorized this project and proceed with it as one of urgency.

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to address this House for the first time. Before I proceed with my speech, I should like to express my sympathy in this House with those voters in my constituency who have during the past few days suffered great losses as a result of the abundant rains.

I should like to extent my sincere congratulations to the hon. member for Walmer on the speech which he made. We came to know the hon. member for Walmer in the Provincial Council as a good speaker, and as a person who could fight for what he believed in. We trust that he will make a positive contribution in this House as well.

It is not usually the case that hon. members’ predecessors still find themselves in this House, but in my case this is in fact what has happened. I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Durbanville on and thank him for the high standard of representation which he set as member for Malmesbury constituency. We believe that he will maintain the same standard in Durbanville as well. On my part I shall endeavour to approach as closely to that standard as possible.

From the first sitting day of this House one was impressed by the high standard of debate, and of the dignity and grandeur of this House. I am convinced that the grandeur of this House lies in the quality of the people who have served it and are still serving it, people with an awareness of their duty, honourable in their conduct and unselfish in their service to their people and the fatherland. It is against this background that one feels puny, but also finds inspiration to do one’s utmost to try to make a humble contribution as representative of one’s constituency in this House to the management of the affairs of one’s fatherland.

Since I represent a constituency which is rural on the one hand and urban on the other, it is obvious that it is important to me that sound interrelationships should exist between the urban and rural portions of my constituency. These two component parts of my constituency represent on the one hand producers and on the other hand consumers. With the increase in the price of foodstuffs it could easily happen that these two groups drift apart, for the necessary mutual understanding for one another’s problems might not always be there. One sometimes reads sharp letters in the Press written by consumers about high prices which are then laid at the door of the producer. I want to say at once that there is among producers in this country a very great measure of responsibility in respect of the retail price of their produce. After all, they are themselves consumers, and in addition see it as a national task to feed the people. It is also a fact that the primary producers of South Africa have never flinched when an appeal was made to them for increased production. Nor will they do so in future. However, I am convinced that with the population explosion, which the hon. member for Innesdal explained so strikingly to us, which we and the world are experiencing, and with the restrictions to which the agricultural industry is subject, we are rapidly moving towards a situation, and I want to emphasize this, where the physical absence of food is going to be more important than what it costs. It is interesting to note that in 1970 there was an overproduction of wheat in the world. The Canadians boasted at the time that they had enough stockpiled wheat supplies to feed the world for two years. Three years later—last year—the international wheat buyers were here in our country as well, looking for any little surplus wheat they would find, for the world wheat supply had been depleted. It almost seems as though one would have to consider with renewed interest the old population theory of Malthus, a theory which he formulated in 1798. However, one does not want to be defeatist, and we should like to believe that with improved production techniques we will succeed in continuing to provide sufficient food supplies for the ever-growing human population, but it will be at a price. As a result of inflation it has become quite impossible to produce at prices which were prevailing only a year ago. In spite of generous assistance from the Government in the form of subsidies on fertilizer, fuel, soil conservation projects, farm mortgage interest and numerous others, production costs have continued to rise. Producers can hardly be expected to produce at lower profit margins than at present, if one takes into consideration that the agricultural industry as a whole had an average net return of only 8% on its capital.

The people have to be fed, whatever the cost. Just as the taxpayer has to make his contribution to defence, education and all other essential services, he shall also have to make his contribution to the provision of foodstuffs at fair prices, and particularly on behalf of those sectors of the population that are not so well off. I want to repeat that the producers of the Republic of South Africa are aware of their responsibility and have a great deal of sympathy for the consumer and will do everything possible, in co-operation with the Government, to increase production and reduce costs in the interests of the country. I hope that consumers will take cognizance of this.

Since I have had such a lot to say about food, and since it is traditional in my constituency to enjoy a little wine with the meal, I should like to say a few words about this wonderful product. I have good reason to believe that members of Parliament have quite a high regard for this product. As most of us know, wine is of course a product which encourages conversation, on the one hand owing to its effects on the emotional state and on the other because it is really a very interesting subject. A study of the history of the vine is in truth a study of the history of nations and civilizations. As long ago as 3 000 years before Christ wine was a well-known product in Egypt, and we read that wine was given as a ration to the high officials of Tuthmosis III. I have a suspicion that even today some high officials would not refuse it if it were offered to them, particularly not if there were a certain label on the container.

In the old civilizations of Mesopotamia, Persia and Palestine wine played an important role in the daily lives of people. This was what they drank—Coca Cola was not yet on the market. I almost forgot to mention that Noah lived in even earlier times. As you know, he liked the product so much that he had more of it than was good for him. Solomon, too, was apparently a wine connoisseur and waxed quite lyrical about its excellent qualities. He warned against it, but a connoisseur usually knows, too, what dangers are involved. Solomon said:

And went on to elaborate on that. Even in the time of Christ and afterwards wine was freely used so that it is until today still used in the Christian churches in the serving of the sacraments. Throughout the history of the Greeks, the Romans and the Germanic peoples wine flows, and a wine culture was born which was established at the Cape with the settlement. On 2 February 1659 Van Riebeeck wrote in his journal—

It was only one small barrel, but from that day onwards wine was a part of the culture and traditions of the Cape. Wine cultivation in the Cape had a chequered history, which I do not want to go into now. Nevertheless it is interesting to note that many of the problems with which they were initially faced, still exist today. The periodic droughts, of which the hon. the Minister of Water Affairs has knowledge, and the floods are still there. The sparrows still eat the grapes and the vine-weevils, powdery mildew and the other pests are all still there. Wine farming, in spite of all the mechanization, is still labour-intensive. Van Riebeeck had his labour problems, and we still have ours today. What is also important, is that the producer today is just as proud of his product as they were in those years even though that product is today being manufactured on a co-operative basis, and no longer in his own cellar. It is interesting to note that it is in fact in the wine industry that the co-operative society found a place at a very early stage. In the year 1909, as a result of marketing problems—hon. members know that wine then cost £1 17s. 6d. per leaguer—a mass protest meeting was held in the Cape City Hall under the leadership of the great champion of co-operative action, Mr. C. W. H. Kohler. Not only were there farmers there, but businessmen also joined the meeting. They then unanimously passed the following motion—

In other words, the entire wine growing region—

In such a serious light did they view the matter, and after the resolution had been adopted, they all marched up to the Houses of Parliament and handed it over to the then Premier, Mr. John X. Merriman. The results were, however, disappointing. Mr. Kohler then simply continued with his organization and in 1918 the K.W.V. was registered. Even then the wine industry still continued to struggle along until the Wine and Spirits Control Act, No. 5 of 1924, was passed, by means of which the K.W.V. obtained a controlling function. After that matters improved, and today it is a strong industry and one which makes an important contribution to the finances of the State in the form of excise, and also as an earner of foreign exchange. Nevertheless there are certain matters in the industry which are causing the producers concern. This was again apparent from our recent agricultural congress here in the Cape. In this way there is for example the idea that the present system of licensing and distribution of liquor under the Liquor Act is obsolete. Without going into the merits of this matter, I want to say that it is not pleasant for a producer to see a bottle of red wine being sold in an hotel at up to three times the price for which it is obtainable on the estate. I have never liked walking into a restaurant to have a meal with a bottle of wine under my arm. There is large-scale concern among producers at what we should like to call “vertical integration” in this industry. It is a fact that there are a few strong groups—actually distribution groups—who are now turning to the production level. It would be an evil day if this tendency develops, for our wine industry has always been the pride of our individual farmers. At this stage I do not want to say any more about this. Producers would like to see their products being available at fair prices to all who want to enjoy them, so as to make life more pleasant and the food tastier.

While I am on the subject of wine I would just like to issue a warning to some of our friends who have built expensive cellars for themselves with the object of maturing red wine in bottles. I would just like them to take stock of the situation, for much of that red wine cannot be matured. Then too, like Solomon, I should like to warn against its abuse. We wine farmers are proud of our product and if the product is abused it harms the dignity of the product and the consumer.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate the hon. member for Malmesbury on his maiden speech. I think he maintained a high standard in his maiden speech. In fact, it was such a high standard that it might not be such a good thing for me to have to make a speech after he has made his, because it might place me in an unfavourable light. I think the standard of his speech was high and that Malmesbury made a fine choice. It may be somewhat contentious if I say that I share his political views, but I am quite sure that there will be general concensus in this House when I say that I share the sentiments he expressed on the products of the vine.

Mr. Speaker, tonight I am deeply conscious of three things—that is apart from the fact that I am feeling quite nervous at the moment. In the first place, I am deeply conscious of my place in this House—that is, literally and figuratively. One of the senior hon. members on that side—I almost said one of the “Old. Guard”—referred to my seat as one of the farthest comer of the “Kitchen” in this House. Nevertheless, I am very proud to occupy this seat in the House in order to represent Krugersdorp. Krugersdorp was named after one of the greatest sons South Africa has ever produced, the town being named after him. To my mind this town is a credit to that name and worthy of it. In the second place, I am also deeply conscious of my responsibility and my duty, which I could perhaps summarize in one word, viz. “service”. Perhaps this applies to all of us. I am referring to service to one’s community, service to one’s constituency and, at a higher level, service to one’s country. This is not an election speech, Mr. Speaker, but I should like to repeat here one promise I made to my constituents, and that is that I shall give my very best to my constituency and, on a wider level, to my country. If my best is good enough, I shall be good enough as well. In the third place, I am of course also conscious of the fact that one does not say contentious things in a maiden speech, but that one should say conscientious things. I should like, in all modesty, to plead my case, because I know my place, although, in a light vein, because I want to be conscientious but, at the same time, seriously, because I want to render a service and because I know what my duty is. I have decided to say a few words on cardio-vascular diseases of the cardiac blood-vessels and, more specifically, coronory thrombosis, and perhaps to be more specific, the prevention of these diseases, i.e. what every hon. member in this House can do to prevent it.

You may perhaps ask, Mr. Speaker: Why coronary thrombosis? I have a great deal of statistics here which I do not want to burden hon. members with at this time of day. The fact of the matter is that coronary thrombosis, or rather diseases of the cardiovascular blood-vessels, is the major cause of death among the adults in the world. Among the Whites in South Africa the death rate, owing to these diseases, is far higher than in the rest of the world. What is more, this percentage is already on the increase for reasons I do not want to mention now. Therefore, we see that it is very important—I shall not say this again for a long time, but I want to say it tonight—to take cognizance of the fact that there is a great deal of brain power and a great deal of energy present on both sides of the House. It is a fact that, as far as these people are concerned, where one has this large concentration of the country’s brain power—this is true, even though I do not include myself among them—the greatest single cause responsible for the country’s losing the major portion of this brain power, is these very cardiovascular diseases. This clearly indicates the influence this one single disease has on the rest of the country. I do not want to deal with the economic or manpower factors. In addition to those who die, we also have the sick, people who become too weak to work, and the accompanying cases of paralysis. I do not want to deal with this now because I think it will take up too much time. I merely want to say that I think it is a very, very important factor in our community today. In fact, I think it is a somewhat gruesome method of combating the population explosion.

My time is limited, Sir, and by that I mean the time I have in which to make my speech and not so much my life-span. I hope I myself shall practise these directions I am going to mention now. I should like to explain what a heart attack really is, why one suffers a heart attack and what one can do to prevent it. In other words, I want to state briefly what the anatomy and physiology are, what the pathology is and, of course, what the prophylactics is as far as that particular person is concerned.

Coronary thrombosis, or a heart attack, is the obstruction of a blood-vessel of the heart itself. I want to mention only two important aspects of this. The one is that this obstruction is not necessarily a blood-clot; there may be other reasons for this and these I shall mention presently. The second factor I want to mention, is that such a heart attack is never a disease in itself; it is part of a general disease of the blood-vessels which reaches its climax at that particular point. In other words, it is not an independent thing. Why then does one suffer a coronary thrombosis? To put it in a different way: Why does every single person not suffer a thrombosis every now and then, as one does a cold? Why does one suffer a coronary thrombosis? The heart is a muscle pump pumping blood through the body 24 hours a day, 365 days a year during a life time of 80 years, if we are physically strong. In the first place, the heart pumps normal blood. When using the expression “normal blood”, I mean blood of normal glutinosity, of normal viscosity or, in the modern idiom, of the proper consistency. In the first instance normal blood is pumped rapidly through a smooth blood-vessel—the third factor—and this smooth blood-vessel is lined with endothelium, which has a negative electric charge. These are the four factors one normally finds: Normal blood which is rapidly pumped over a smooth surface with a negative charge. The blood platelets in the blood also have a negative charge and the blood platelets are responsible for coagulation. Consequently no coagulation takes place, because the blood flows rapidly and smoothly; there is a negative charge and the two negative charges repel one another. Why does one then suffer thrombosis? Of course, one suffers thrombosis when those four normal factors are disturbed. In which way are these four normal factors disturbed? In the first place we have, of course, the question of diet. Glucose and oxygen are the only sources of energy the body has; there is no other source of energy. Even Sasolburg is unable to help us in that respect. The glucose is, of course, obtained from the diet, and the oxygen we inhale. When one eats, the food goes to the liver where it is converted into glucose, and the liver is stocked with glucose, but that is only a small portion of it. Then another small portion is used for building up the body—proteins and that kind of thing—and a large portion of that food is then converted into triglycerides—and this is the name we must remember—which are tiny particles of fat. These triglycerides are converted into normal fat which is stored in the fat cells. In other words, the large quantities of food we eat, are taken to the fat cells by means of triglycerides, and it is these triglycerides which are so dangerous. They are tiny fat particles. As soon as they constitute too high a percentage in the blood, they are forced into the intima, especially at a curve in a blood-vessel or where a blood-vessel splits; this coarsens the inside of the blood-vessel; this causes it to develop tiny cracks; eventually it causes the inner layers to lift; it removes its negative charge and then one can suffer a coronary thrombosis because the blood will now flow slowly because it contains too much fat; it is too thick; the blood-vessel has narrowed; this causes it to flow even slower; the paries is coarsened; it has lost its negative charge and therefore these things collect there, narrow the blood-vessel and one suffers coronary thrombosis. I may perhaps just add the following.

†When this change has taken place, then the stage is set for the attack. Sir, we have heard a lot in this debate about change, but this is one change which is a dangerous change, a malicious change and very often in the end a lethal change.

*We must remember that these triglycerides are mainly formed by highly refined starches, and not so much by fats.

†Sir, I have no adverse intentions towards any specific province in this country or any sugar-coated constituencies in this country, but the fact is that pure white sugar is the main culprit.

*Finely refined white sugar is the main cause, and then also other finely refined foodstuffs such as polished rice, Aunt Sina’s koeksisters which take all the prizes at the show, and biscuits; these are the very dangerous foodstuffs. Fats are also dangerous, but it has been proved beyond doubt that the refined starches are much more dangerous than the fats as such, for it is these refined starches which give one the high triglycerides.

Mr. Speaker, I have mentioned the factors causing a heart-attack. In these changes, diet is the most important factor. I just want to mention briefly two other factors. The one is that which we call “stress” in English. I do not think we have a very good word for it in Afrikaans.

“Spanning”.

“Spanning” is tension; it is not really “stress”. It is only a kind of stress. I am referring to any stress affecting the body. Sir, in the old days one had more acute conditions of stress, for example when a lion attacked a man, or something of that nature. That attack caused an acute condition of stress. A large amount of adrenaline was released. This adrenaline immediately released a large amount of those fats, triglycerides, into the blood and it went to the liver, and one’s reaction was to fight or flee and those fats were immediately consumed. The man fled or fought and those triglycerides were destroyed. Today, Sir, as we are sitting in this House, we are also developing tension; one becomes annoyed and one says something one is not allowed to say and the Speaker calls one to order. One does practically nothing, but one develops these tensions. In other words, we do not fight, we do not flee, but we are constantly under stress, although it is mainly of a lower intensity. The result is that those fats are sent to the liver to be consumed, but the liver does not consume them. After all, one does not do anything; one only sits. Now the fat is sent back and one has a continuously high concentration of fats, and then one can suffer a heart attack. The following usually happens to young people under the age of 40 years: Suddenly, if he gets annoyed and receives a little more fat, that fat is sufficient to block the narrowed blood-vessel, and one suffers a heart attack, a coronary thrombosis without there being a blood-clot. This happens in the majority of the cases with young people. It is interesting to note that if one suffers a heart attack when one is under 40 years of age, one’s chances of survival are not very good, and between 40 and 60 years one’s chances are far better, but over 60 years one’s chances are not so good either because, as these blood-vessels narrow, in the process I have just mentioned, separate vessels open and under 40 years of age not enough separate vessels have opened. Therefore, coronary thrombosis is more dangerous under 40 years of age. Between 40 and 60 years of age there are sufficient alternative blood-vessels open and one’s chances to survive are better, but over 60 years of age those alternative blood-vessels are calcifying, and one has even less chance of surviving when one is over 60 years of age.

But I can add one other factor to this condition of stress and that is the question of the goitre. When one has this reaction of stress and the triglycerides are not consumed, the goitre secretes a hormone which immediately drives the triglycerides back so that the fat content of the blood does not reach too high a level. But under continuous stress the goitre gets tired of doing this and eventually it no longer reacts to it. It is like in politics, when someone tells a story year after year. Eventually hardly anyone listens to it and no one responds to it in any case. This also applies in real life. Eventually the goitre no longer reacts and it does not secrete this hormone to repel these fats immediately and one is left with that high level of fat in one’s blood.

One final cause I want to mention as far as this condition is concerned, is smoking. It is interesting to notice that we, the Whites in South Africa, are the heaviest smokers in the world. I do not know whether this includes dagga, but this is nevertheless the information I have. Smoking narrows the blood-vessels, and as I said a moment ago, this is a very important factor in heart attacks. This, Sir, is more or less why someone suffers a heart attack and this brings me to the final point I want to mention briefly, and that is the prevention of heart attacks. Our country can no longer afford it. I think the State, the Department of Health and the medical practitioners will have to do a great deal more to prevent this condition in future, because, as I say, the people suffering from it, are those in leading positions; these are the adults, the trained people, the leaders. The young men often suffer from what they call “manager’s disease” in English. This causes the death of the young, brilliant economists. Our country cannot afford it and all of us will have to do a great deal more to prevent this state of affairs. But what I really want to ask tonight, is: What can we, as persons in this House itself, do to prevent it, and what can the people outside, as persons, do about it? This is of course logical from what I have already told you, that one should in the first place limit one’s intake of animal fats—all fats, but especially animal fats—for this is the cholesterol, which is the second most important factor. But the most important, in spite of sugar imports or exports, is that we must not only limit our intake of refined starches, but avoid them completely. One point to illustrate this, is quite remarkable. They discovered sugar as a cause when it was noticed that as a country’s sugar consumption increases, so does the number of heart-attacks. Thus we also find, for example, among our Bantu in this country. At one stage they practically never suffered heart-attacks, but as their standard of living improved and as they consumed more sugar, the number of heart-attacks have increased along parallel lines. Perhaps I should not call it parallel lines; perhaps I should say they go hand in hand, for they are constantly in contact with one another. Sir, I say we must reduce our fat intake, particularly animal fats, and we must adapt our diets in such a way that we eliminate the refined starches completely. Another very important factor is the question of what we eat and when we eat. We must change our eating habits altogether. In the light of the explanation I furnished of how the fats move backwards and forwards, it would be ideal if we eat a little at intervals of one or two hours, but this, of course, is not possible. But now we make the serious mistake of having a light breakfast or no breakfast at all and do not eat much for lunch either, but we enjoy a big dinner. In the night one does not need any energy to sleep, especially not the older men. The younger men do some running around. [Laughter.] Sir, what I mean, is that the young people have to change the baby’s nappies and do some running around for the children during the night, something the old people no longer have to do. All they have to do, is sleep. [Laughter.] We eat a great deal in the evening, and much of that food must be stored in the fats. The stored triglycerides are released again when one gets up in the morning, and in this way one constantly keeps the fat content and one’s blood triglycerides too high. Therefore, if one wants to eat only once a day, one should rather eat in the morning. One must eat less a day, but rather eat more often and less at a time, if possible. One should, of course, not smoke either, and—in spite of what I said about the sentiments I share with the hon. member for Malmesbury—one should not drink. Alcohol is a good thing, for it widens the blood-vessels, but then only in normally prescribed quantities. As soon as one consumes too much alcohol, it has a detrimental effect, because it is refined and provides high triglycerides and causes the blood-vessels to narrow even further.

I conclude with this thought, that we must specifically and deliberately set aside time for relaxation, in order to cope with the stresses and strains of life and keep the fat content of one’s blood low by relaxing completely and reflecting calmly on life, and not to live under constant tension. Finally, the same argument applies in this regard which applies for any other disease, and that is that if one leads a normal, active healthy life, one will naturally have a greater resistance and will not suffer a coronary attack so easily.

My explanation was rather brief and incomplete for, as you know, Sir, millions and millions of words have been written on this subject, but I think that if I was able, through my small contribution, to prevent just one member from suffering a heart-attack, it would have been worth my while and would make me feel good at heart.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure and privilege to contratulate the hon. member for Krugersdorp on his maiden speech. I am pleased to welcome him in this House and should like to express the hope that his service here will be fruitful and pleasant. I hope he will have a long life.

†It is hardly fair for a man who is about to deliver his maiden speech, to have to listen to the symptoms manifest before a heart attack! I must confess that the symptoms were very accurately described by the hon. member, in particular when he came to the point concerning tension. It was then that I needed the hon. member for Malmesbury most.

I would like to take this very first opportunity, as one who has the honour to represent Pinelands, to identify myself with the comments made by other members in this House concerning the late Mr. Newton Thompson. I think I know better than most, that were it not for his tragic death, he would be in this House now. I would like to pay very briefly, a tribute to his memory and to the service that he gave to this House and to his country.

Mr. Speaker, if I had had more time I would have liked to concentrate on several aspects of the Budget, but as this is not possible now, let me try to focus on only one aspect. With many others I would like to congratulate the hon. the Minister of Finance for granting tax concessions to the private sector in order to enable, encourage and stimulate further training for Black workers in urban areas. This is the second such concession made by the hon. the Minister in recent months and it is hoped that the private sector will take advantage of these concessions with immediate effect. All too often we have waited and when concessions are made they are simply not taken up.

There are two comments which I would like to make with regard to the training of Blacks in urban areas. Firstly, I want to refer to the nature of the training that is required. Whilst, of course, basic skills are of major importance I would suggest that in the South African context something even more fundamental is required, namely, a training, which has been described by some, as economic literacy. So long as the greater proportion of our Black labour intake is rural and even pre-industrial, so long will it be necessary to afford them that kind of training which will enable them to take their place in a modem complex industrial State. It is quite clear in training that when a man believes that he belongs to the concern for which he is working, that there will be far greater job satisfaction, and a greater awareness of his united effort with management and fellow-workers. I am convinced that even more important than the basic and fundamental skills that we have to give to all our workers, there is need for this economic literacy to which I have referred. Indeed, very often the teaching of basic skills comes to naught, because the worker concerned lacks the orientation which he so desperately requires. It may well be that this kind of training is not possible in every individual company. If this is the case, and I believe that it is so, it points to the need for the establishment of training institutes in South Africa. On a recent trip about a month or so ago to six or seven countries in the Far East and Europe, looking at labour representation problems and also labour needs, one thing stood out for me and that is the emphasis on training at every single level whether it be in top management or whether it be in the labour class. This was particularly true of Japan, as well as of Holland and of Germany. It was not always left to the individual company and certainly not left to the Government. Very often you have two forces coming together, forces which are so often held apart almost in a spirit of confrontation. I speak now of the forces of management and the forces of labour. I think particularly of a training institute I visited just outside Amsterdam set up jointly by management and labour unions for training of all kinds. One of the aspects of training which they focused upon was this orientation of the worker who comes from the rural area into the urban area. I was greatly impressed by this spirit of co-operation between the management on the one hand and the labour unions on the other. I would hope very much that in taking up the opportunities that are present in industry today in South Africa that these two forces in our country will come together and work together for the kind of training institutes which I have described. It is impossible to train people fully and effectively without their becoming aware of the problems of management on the one hand as well as the problems of labour on the other. When management seeks to do this on its own, it falls short of that kind of labour view, as it were, and when labour unions seek to do this training on their own, they too fall short of the normal problems faced by management. In Holland—I hope also in South Africa—we can concentrate on a common concern to which the hon. the Minister of Finance referred and that is the problem of productivity, the problem of growth and stability. This is an area of concern which is shared by management and by labour; management rightly looking for a reasonable return on capital investment and labour rightly looking for job security, wage increases and benefits. If together labour and management could focus on this area of common concern, then they could take advantage of the concessions, the benefits which are made possible in the new tax concessions. Naturally one would have to develop this in far greater detail than I have time to do in these brief moments.

The other point—I said there were two—that I should like to make about the training of Blacks in urban areas is that it is one thing to concentrate on the contents of the training—and this is vital—but there is another area also and that is that we must constantly ask the question: What is the end result of this training? We well know that if we simply keep training people and never give them the opportunity to develop that training, to use those newly-acquired skills, then the result will not be an increase in productivity but an increase in inflation, because we shall not be making the maximum use of the human resources available to us in this country. Further, if people are trained for specific jobs and they are not enabled to take the maximum advantage of that training, then, instead of job enrichment leading to job satisfaction, you have rather frustration and disillusionment and even worse. If we are going to go for growth and if the labour force in our country is going to be stable and peaceful, then on the one hand we must, as the hon. the Minister has pointed out and as is being made possible once again, offer these opportunities for training. On the other hand, however, we must do everything in our power, both in the public and the private sector, to make it possible for that training to be the best kind of training, to be the kind of training needed specifically in South Africa—training which will lead to greater job opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I think it has been characteristic of this session so far that we have had maiden speeches of a particularly high quality. With his speech I think that the hon. member for Pinelands, who has just resumed his seat, has indeed continued the tradition of the past week, placing as he did the emphasis on training in the various sectors of our country’s economic industries.

I should like to dwell briefly on two aspects which the Opposition has brought to the fore in the past few days, the first aspect is the question of inflation which we must see in the correct perspective. The second aspect is the accuzation against the Government, by the Opposition, in connection with the Government’s ideological policy and the multi-national policy which supposedly stands in the way of dynamic economic growth.