I should like at the outset to express our appreciation to the hon. the Minister for his announcement that he will incorporate a Smuts commemorative stamp into the series for 1975. I agree to his suggestion that we reconsider the occasion to be commemorated. We can discuss that with him later. On behalf of this side of the House, I want to express to him our appreciation for his acceptance of that proposal.

Mr. Chairman, we raised a number of matters during the Second Reading debate. In regard to these matters, I am afraid that the hon. the Minister gave a very superficial reply to the debate. We are therefore obliged at this Committee Stage to return to a number of the issues with which he did not deal at all or with which he dealt very cursorily. I should like in the first instance to ask him to reply to the hon. member for Wynberg in regard to the important matters which he raised. The hon. the Minister will now have had an opportunity of studying the hon. member’s Hansard and I hope that he will deal with the matters raised by the hon. member.

I want to come back to the question which I raised of the staff establishment and the employees of the Post Office. Firstly, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether he stands by the figures which he gave us during his Budget Speech. Are they or are they not the correct figures? The hon. the Minister does not reply. It is difficult to debate a matter under these circumstances. I suggested that there had been an error. The hon. the Minister did not explain in detail; in fact, he did not give us a satisfactory explanation at all. What I am trying to establish is, whether the information given in his Budget Speech was correct or incorrect? The hon. the Minister does not reply in this regard either. Therefore, we must investigate this position to determine just who is right and who is wrong.

In the hon. the Minister’s Budget Speech he said that the departmental establishment—I emphasize the word “establishment”—consisted of 41 545 Whites and 8 727 non-Whites. If the hon. the Minister stands by these figures, how does he explain that in the Estimates of Operating Expenditure under the heading “Establishment” a figure is given for Whites of 42 699—compared with a figure of 41 545 given in his Budget Speech for the same date and for the same heading; and under non-Whites, a figure of 22 336 compared to the hon. the Minister’s figure of 8 727. We are not talking about employees here; we are talking about the establishment. The heading in the index to these Estimates states “Particulars of establishment”, not of “employees”. One or other of these two figures is therefore incorrect. This is the position and now this House is being asked to vote a certain sum of money in this regard. Surely, if we are being asked to vote money to pay people, we are entitled to know whom we are paying? We are entitled to know how many people we are paying. I come back to the figures I quoted in regard to the number of people who are being paid. This is the figure as at 31 July.

On 31 July the Post Office was paying 62 981 people. I want to know what has happened to the other 2 500 people. They were being paid so therefore they must have been employed. This figure does not correspond with the figure for the establishment and it does not correspond with the figure given by the hon. the Minister. The difference in time is four months—four months from the date of his Budget Speech to the date when this number of persons was being paid by the Post Office. Does he wish to suggest that in those four months we have had 1 500 resignations from the Post Office? Is that what is concerning him about the staff position? I believe that this House is entitled to that information and I ask the hon. the Minister again to give us an answer to this question.

I asked the hon. the Minister to tell us the duration of the training period for non-White technicians. Although the right direction is being followed I believe he is only playing with this problem. If he expects to cope with the problems he is experiencing in the Post Office, he is going to have to do a great deal better than this. Once they have been trained, I feel that we are entitled to more information in regard to the phrase “within the field of Government policy”. Surely the time has come when we have to tackle this job as a matter of urgency and not as a matter of Government policy? We must tackle it as a matter of getting the Post Office service brought up to date, eliminating the backlog and being able to face the future.

*Here we cannot play with words as far as Government policy is concerned. It is high time we face the problem squarely and accept the solution, as the department is doing. The hon. the Minister, however, is now trying to hide this behind the screen of Government policy. It is beyond any doubt that on the basis of the steps being taken at present, we shall never be able to eliminate our backlog. The hon. the Minister said that the increase of 3 000 in the backlog as far as the waiting list is concerned, between March and the present moment, was due to economic growth. Precisely, Sir, this is just what we said during the Second Reading debate. His department will not be able to cope with a growth economy. The reason for this greater improvement, is that we experienced a period of reduced growth, and as a result of the reduction in the growth rate, we were afforded the opportunity of catching up with the backlog to a certain degree, but now that we are experiencing growth anew, we immediately find that our backlog has increased by 3 000, compared with three months ago.

†Sir, this is the issue; we are having to face a growth economy, and the hon. the Minister admitted in his reply to the Second Reading debate that we had gone backwards because of the growth in the economy.

Sir, what of the future? I asked the hon. the Minister to tell this House and South Africa what his estimate is of the demand over the next 10 years and over the next 20 years. He did not dispute my figure of 5 million taken from Live Wire, the Telecommunications Association’s own magazine. Sir, he is the Minister; he owes this House a look into the future; he owes it to us to tell us what demand he is planning to meet. These are all matters which the hon. the Minister left in the air with superficial, evasive answers. He has not explained how, with a growth of a little over 9% in capital expenditure, he is going to cope with the inflation and the backlog and the future demand, because that is the net increase in capital to be spent on telecommunications, excluding overseas expenditure on Capital Account.

Sir, with an inflation rate of 10 or 12 or 15%, this increase of about 9% in capital expenditure does not even cover the rate of inflation. What does this mean in relation to capital progress in meeting the future demands of the department? Mr. Chairman, one of our suggestions was that more use should be made of the services of private contractors and the Minister said that there would be friction if that were done. How can there be friction? If private contractors are working on one sector, they are not working with other workers, and if they happen to be Italian or French or German, or whatever they may be, with whom are they creating friction if they are maintaining a sector which is their responsibility? I do not believe that the hon. the Minister is giving us the full picture. I believe that there is a great deal more that can be done by making use of the services of private contractors to build, to instal and to maintain modern exchanges. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Point, in referring to his predecessor in this House on Wednesday, said that the lines had crossed, with the result that there was a wrong number in this House. Sir, I do not think that is quite correct. I think it was partly due to a blackout or, let me say, a Schwarz-out of the previous member for Orange Grove.

*Sir, I want to come back to the amendment of the hon. member for Durban Point. The hon. member suggested that the Post Office officials were working under tremendous pressure as a result of the backlog being experienced in the Department of Posts and Telecommunications. Sir. I think it is time that we in South Africa stop having pity for people when they work hard. There should be appreciation for people who have to render a service under difficult circumstances at times and who work hard to render that service, but before we start pitying these people we should rather hold them up as an example to other departments and groups who could follow their example very profitably. Sir, yesterday and again today the hon. member made that side of the House out to be the champions of officialdom, not only the officialdom of this department but of the officials of all the various State departments. Sir, to me it is interesting that it is precisely that side of the House that is always the first to complain when services are not to its satisfaction. The hon. member himself referred to it—I concede this at once—in a jocular vein, but the barb was there all the same. Sir, if the hon. member wants to champion the cause of the officials, he should at least be consistent. He suggests that on Saturdays the post offices should be open for service only between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. What is he giving to the officials of the telephone exchange division? Does he want to give these people the same privilege, to let them work shorter hours and provide a poorer service? No, Sir, if one wants to champion the cause of officialdom, one should be consistent in one’s requests and representations. Sir, I think that this House and all persons who are served by the department owe a debt of gratitude to the staff not only for their service and sacrifice but also for the example, one which we can follow, set by this department and particularly the Minister and the Postmaster-General in combating inflation in a very practical manner during the past financial year. If the Minister and the Postmaster-General had purely been intent on making a profit with no regard to the service motive, it would definitely not have been possible to exclude increased tariffs. Sir, yesterday attention was directed in a very knowledgeable way at the savings that had been effected by the department and the higher productivity that had been achieved over the past year. Attention was also directed at the industriousness of the staff of this department. In this regard I should very much like to mention a few smaller items, smaller items which may be of lesser importance to this House but which do, indeed, exert a very great influence on the industriousness of the staff, as well as on the capital structure and the cost factor. Applications for telephones are constantly being received, but when one looks at the cost structure in this division over the past year, one finds that a tremendous increase has taken place. The price of the telephone apparatus alone—i.e. of an automatic urban apparatus—has increased from R24,50 to R31, in other words, an increase of 26%. As far as the automatic farm-line apparatus is concerned—the telephone apparatus alone—the increase was from R20,56 to R39,72, an increase of close on 90%. In the case of batteries used by each apparatus, the increase was from R11,30 to R14,30, an increase of 27%. The price of the container for the battery has increased from 42 cents to 68 cents, an increase of 62%. Sir, when we consider the total number of telephones installed during the past year, we find that these increased costs amounted to R1 300 000. That is not the total cost; that is merely the increase in prices as compared to the previous year.

And you are going to cover this with a 9% capital increase.

Sir, when we take into account the time devoted to every installation and the depreciation charges and the costs in respect of vehicles, then what the department has done in this field definitely amounts to an achievement. By way of illustrating the productivity of our telephone officials in particular, I want to give you these interesting particulars: The number of telephone calls per person in the previous year was 14 300 as against slightly more than 15 000 in the past year. In other words, there were 1 million more manual trunk calls, while the staff decreased by 280. Sir, it is precisely from the staff of this particular department, where technical and semi-skilled technical staff are used for the maintenance of our telephone services, as well as the installation of telephones, that such a drainage of staff members, attracted by the private sector, has taken place in recent times. It has been found that only 10% of the capacities of these technically trained or semi-trained persons is used in the private sector as compared to the utilization thereof in the service of the telecommunications division of the department. That is why we once again wish to plead, in the interests of the manpower shortage, that the private sector allow these people to continue providing this important service.

Now, it is also interesting to look at the telephone waiting lists. The hon. member for Durban Point constantly says that the backlog cannot be made up. When we look at the waiting list we see that it has grown by approximately 3 050 during the past year. But when we look at the United Kingdom, Britain, we see that its waiting list has grown from 108 000 to 122 000 during the past year. In West Germany it has grown from 331 000 to 363 000. In the U.S.A., where the service is operated by a private company, it has grown from 46 000 to 63 000. Our department has, indeed, done well in the circumstances. I should like to put the request to the hon. the Minister, however, that higher priority should be given to the industrial areas as well as the border industrial areas in the planning of the automatization of telephone exchanges. I want to refer to one area, the exchange of the Harrismith border industrial area, where telephone traffic has virtually quadrupled during the past 18 months. I should very much like to ask that serious attention be given to giving preference, in the automatization of the telephones, to all these growth points, particularly the border industrial areas.

Finally, I should like to express the thought that we are living in an age of the containerization of freight. We are grateful for the progress that has already been made in this regard by the Railways and in the harbours, but I think the time has also arrived for the Department of Posts to change over to containerization for the dispatching of mail and parcels. It is true that the old postbag to which we have become accustomed has been providing a good service, but it is also true that in some instances parcels are damaged in these old postbags, and in the same way one’s letters and illustrations which are sometimes sent by post are damaged or ruined in the old postbags. For that reason I want to ask the department to consider introducing containerization into the conveyance of our mail as well as our parcels. At present a reasonably strong polythene container is obtainable but when one takes safety and security into consideration, one will probably have to change over to metal containers. I nevertheless want to ask that this be considered. [Time expired.]

The hon. member for Bethlehem has taken it amiss of us for acting here as the supporters of the officials, or a certain section of them, in a matter in respect of which we feel that they are entitled to certain things. I just want to tell him that we shall continue doing so. When any section comes to us with a reasonable case and we know it is possible to comply with their request, we shall continue performing our task in that respect.

I should just like to come to the hon. the Minister for a moment. Yesterday he announced here the loss that was suffered in respect of postal services in a manner which reminded me very much of the story of the servant who came running up to the house saying: “The master has overturned the car, his leg is broken, but at least the sock has not been torn.” What did the hon. the Minister tell us in his speech? He told us that in respect of postal services there was a deficit of R6,2 million. He said we should be satisfied with that because things were not going quite as badly for us as he had thought they would. But is it so impossible for the Post Office to show a profit on postal services? Surely it is not impossible, Sir. In 1967-’68 a profit was shown on postal services. The chronic loss suffered in this respect, has, ironically enough, been suffered since the time the Post Office obtained its antonomy and has been run on business principles. But even this R6,2 million is not such an achievement when one compares it to the losses suffered in the previous years. In 1971-’72 there was a loss of R2,7 million. Therefore it is very clear to me that, instead of trying to explain away these losses, our policy ought to be to search for the reasons for these losses in all seriousness. The turnover, as far as postal items are concerned, increased by only 8,7% from 1967 to 1968. I have already said on a previous occasion that no one can convince me that there is no connection between the turnover of a business and the profit that is made. I want to refer to certain different categories of postal items. In the report we find that in the case of seven categories of postal items, we now handle under 25% of the type of postal item we handled in 1967-’68, when a profit was shown. Where has the mistake crept in? Hon. members opposite spoke of tariffs and said: “Look how good we are; the Minister did not announce any tariff increases.” Sir, surely none of us are greenhorns. In six months’ time we shall again be assembled here. In addition to that, I must say that this year the Minister had the advantage of having had his Additional Estimates approved in February. It is clear to me that in respect of certain categories unrealistic tariffs are applicable. We cannot go on in this way, for the Post Office must, whether it wishes to do so or not, provide new services. When a new township is established it has to make the capital investments in that township. During this period the staff increased by 30%. In other words, the hon. the Minister cannot continue in the same way as a company which opens up chain stores everywhere without showing any worthwhile improvement in income, and then be amazed when losses are suffered.

Another point I want to mention in this regard is that the public has definitely built up a resistance in respect of certain of these categories. When referring to these seven categories, I should very much like the hon. the Minister to tell us very clearly which of them are so uneconomical that they prevent the Post Office from showing a profit.

There is another matter I want to raise, and I want to approach it from a business point of view, and not from an emotional point of view. Sir, whether it wants to be or not, the Post Office must be the show case of the policy of apartheid. If a stranger comes to town and asks one, “What does apartheid look like?” One replies, “Just walk down the street. Go to the first post office. There you will be able to see major and minor apartheid simultaneously in one performance.” In post offices one sees the separate entrances and the duplication. Then one might find a person behind a long counter moving between White and non-White South Africa. As I have said, I am not approaching this question from an emotional point of view. I am simply speaking from a business point of view. In this spirit I should now like to ask the hon. the Minister a favour. He should please ask his architects, when they are drawing up plans for new buildings, to give him two sets of plans, the one set minus all these things and the other drawn up according to present practice. If he accepts the first plan he will no doubt find that it will effect considerable savings. Or, Sir, is this the price we have to pay to keep ourselves White? Sir. the hon. the Minister has 13 work-study officers. I wonder whether he cannot ask them to make a survey on the productivity which is lost as a result of this question of “in and out of the window”, and of a long counter at which one person serves.

I want to go further and mention the salary increases. Earlier on it was said there had been an average increase of 10%. I want to say that this does not satisfy the high expectations which were cherished by the staff associations. They definitely cherished very high expectations. In the Postal Journal of March 1974, the official organ of the South African Postal Association, we find the following—

That is history now. We know that the officials are rather disappointed, for they still have the same Government and the same Cabinet, although in a slightly reconditioned form, and they are stuck with the same Minister. But I should now like to ask seriously what their expectations were. One finds them in this article. They said they hoped that, through increases and improvements in the salary structure, they would be placed in the position to maintain once again the standard of living they maintained in 1971. Secondly, they already built up an argument months ago by accepting that they would in fact get a salary increase which would put them in a position to maintain the same standard of living as previously. However, they are also asking what is to happen about the accumulative losses they suffered in the period between the increases. It is particularly interesting to note that according to this official organ it has been determined that, even by taking into account the 15% increase there was last year by means of an allowance, “the net burden the members will be shouldering is estimated to be in the vicinity of 9,1% of their total gross earnings received over the preceding 40 months. For this shortfall to be made up in the 12 months to follow thereon, a salary increase of 30,25% would be needed.” These are the hard facts of which they are convinced, and this is not what I am saying. This is what the officials say they actually need, i.e. an increase of 30,25%. I know that hon. members will now say that it is not possible. In June 1974 the following was said in this same publication:

Does this not constitute a condemnation of the conditions in which we in South Africa live? A group of people is able to prove that, in terms of the shortfalls suffered by them, an increase of 30,25% is justified. I must accept that the hon. the Minister did in fact grant them the increase permitted by the economy. No doubt he gave the increase he was capable of giving. Particularly in the light of what the hon. the Minister said in connection with officials who were being lured away from the service of the Post Office, I presume that he would have gone as far as he possibly could. Surely, this proves to us that the dilemma of the Post Office is actually the dilemma of the whole of South Africa as well. The Minister said that an average increase of 10% was granted. When one speaks of an average, it means that there probably are persons who received less than 10%. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Central who, I take it is the shadow of the former hon. member for Florida, insinuated in so many words that apartheid should be abolished at post offices. I think my interpretation of what he meant is correct. Now surely it is a reflection on the White person to expect of him that he should pay for the facilities of the non-White. In other words, the hon. member wants the official policy of the governing party to go to rack and ruin in order to level criticism at a report at which extremely little criticism can in fact be levelled.

The hon. member referred to the losses suffered in the sphere of postal administration, but he was silent about those services which showed a profit. Surely the hon. member could see from this report that the department is engaged in automization. Surely he knows that 80% of the expenditure of the Post Office related to labour and that automization, is being effected with a view to savings and that savings will be effected by that means in the year ahead.

I should like to deal with the department in general. The Department of Posts and Telecommunications, or the Post Office as it is known in the everyday language of the man in the street, is the department which has to endure perhaps the most criticism of all Government departments in South Africa, unjust criticism, criticism which is unnecessary and is usually based on ignorance. This is the man who is angry about the letter which arrives too late or the post office queue which is too long, the man who complains about the telephone account which he thinks is too high, or the technicians who drinks coffee while he should have been working, etc. I am best able to express myself, Mr. Chairman, by referring to Langenhoven’s little poem—

(We are quick to complain about stamps without gum but what would we do if the Post Office went on strike and far-off voices were struck dumb?)

It is this same type of critic who does not realize how absolutely dependent South Africa is on the Post Office. In this regard I should like to break a lance for the Post Office today. This department is one of the biggest of all the departments in South Africa; this department performs one of the greatest tasks in South Africa; this department is one of those which works the hardest of all the departments in South Africa and possesses one of the largest organizations of all the departments in South Africa. This afternoon I should like to break a lance for the 64 000 employees of this department, these people who are on duty 24 hours a day, who have to work 365 days of the year, who, weather conditions notwithstanding, have to go on doing their job, these technicians who sometimes, during the recent flood damage, had to swim rivers in order to restore the telecommunications connections. Sometimes they had to be lowered by helicopter to effect certain essential repair work at microwave stations which had been completely cut off from the power supply. These people had to pump metres of mud out of manholes and camp for days in their cars in order to perform the necessary work. And when the storm rains hit the Cape, as occurred on 20 August, 20 000 telephones are out of order the next day. Then we show this department no mercy. It has to restore that telephone service. That is the situation we find ourselves in today. And that is why, in my tribute to the post office workers, I should like once again to employ this excellent little poem of Langenhoven’s—

(Never neglecting his duties which cost us so little, unheard, unseen, unpraised he continues to serve, each man of the post at his post.)

Mr. Chairman, today I want to appeal to the public of South Africa for a better grasp and for greater appreciation in regard to matters involving the Post Office. In future years this Post Office will have to see to the maintenance of two million telephones, will have to see to the transfer, the disconnection and the re-installation of half a million telephones. This department will have to see to the provision of new services to 100 000 new subscribers. In the sphere of telecommunication it will have to see to the handling of 4 000 million inland call units. This figure is the more impressive when one analyses it and realizes that it shows an increase of 50% over the past three years. This department will have to see to the handling of more than 100 million manually operated trunk calls which will have to be switched and recorded, and, in the year ahead, will have to see to the handling of the thirteenfold increase in international telecommunications traffic over the past 12 months. In this year this department will also have to see to the handling of the more than hundredfold increase in subscribers’ dialled call minutes to countries in Africa, and at the same time, see to the daily handling of about five million postal articles. That is why at this stage I should like to return for a moment to the annual report of the Postmaster-General. I do not want to use too extravagant adjectives in expressing myself on this report, but when last has the general public, that is generally so critical, received a report of this quality with so much praise and so many bouquets? Die Volksblad when referring to this report, talks about “a bouquet to the Post Office and its boss”. The Department of Information calls it “exceptionally good”. SAFTO says of it: “Let me congratulate you on an excellent presentation of your annual report”. The South African diplomatic Mission in Salisbury says of it: “The most impressive annual report we have seen.” To this can be added the praise and the bouquets bestowed by the Financial Mail and the Rand Daily Mail. It is therefore very clear that it is this report that clearly points to the dedication of the officials, the responsibility of the Postmaster-General and the dedication and responsibility of the hon. the Minister in the handling and production of this endproduct as a whole. If this is the product of these officials, of the Postmaster-General and of the hon. the Minister, we have no doubt that the department and the administration of Posts and Telecommunications are once again in good and sound hands for the financial year 1974-’75.

I should like to deal with the Budget speech. There was one aspect of it which struck me. Over the past 12 months there has been an increase in the consumer price index of 9,7%. There has also been an increase in the wholesale price index, seasonally adjusted, of 18,8% over the past 12 months. Salary increases of between 15% and 17½% have been granted over the past 12 months too, and this will mean an additional expenditure of R28 million. There has also been a tremendous rise in capital expenditure in recent times and increased capital expenditure has had to be budgeted for. This again, necessarily means that more money has to be borrowed at a higher rate of interest. In this same period, major capital expenditure has to be incurred in respect of giant projects and the modernization of the Post Office machinery and equipment. In spite of all these circumstances, the hon. the Minister announced in his Budget that there was to be no increase in service tariffs. This aspect is best accentuated by an editorial which appears in today’s Die Burger. They say: “The withholding of tariff increases borders on the miraculous.” In my opinion it is almost unthinkable that in the midst of all these problems we have to contend with, service tariffs could have remained at their present level, that it was unnecessary to announce any increase. This particular aspect of the budget debate points to a further three important factors. Firstly, it points to the able management of the department. Secondly, it points to the improved productivity of the department and, thirdly, to the sound planning which provides, too, for an increase of 50% for the year ahead in the amounts voted for the erection of buildings and telephone exchanges and for the tremendous progress which will have to be made in the field of television electronics.

With these few words I want to convey my very best wishes and thanks to the hon. the Minister and his officials for what has been done for South Africa in the field of postal administration in the past financial year. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we know that White employees in the Post Office are adequately catered for by their staff associations. The hon. the Minister paid tribute yesterday, and on previous other occasions, to the co-operation which he received from these bodies in a variety of ways. One is grateful for this spirit of co-operation. However, I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister what formal provision is made by the Post Office for consultation with the growing number of Brown and Black workers whom it employs. What machinery does exist for establishing these people’s needs, their grievances and their problems? Is there any such machinery? If there is formal machinery in existence, could the hon. the Minister tell us whether he, his department and the Postmaster-General are satisfied that this is the most effective and satisfactory machinery that can be created for this purpose. The ideal solution would of course be mixed trade unions—that will no doubt shock some of my friends opposite, as so many things seem to do. As mixed trade unions are in conflict with Government policy, the alternative obviously is to try to get the closest co-operation between White and Black bodies so as to avoid competition. We saw the dangers of competition and jealousy in the situation that arose in Durban. I think that is something to be avoided under all circumstances. This is a matter which is going to grow increasingly important in the years ahead, as I have already said. I do hope that the hon. the Minister will be able to spell out his intentions fairly clearly, particularly in view of the labour trouble he has had in Durban.

There is another subject I should like to raise. We know and have been told by both the Postmaster-General and the hon. the Minister that a tremendous amount of overtime work is already being done by the Post Office staff. I gather that a great deal of it is done voluntarily, while the rest is very properly and rightly paid for. I gather that there was a time when the installing of telephones was done over weekends, including Sundays, but that that has now been stopped. I wonder whether the question of overtime work on Sundays, which I know is a very sensitive question, could not be brought up again in view of the very grave staff situation which the Post Office faces. I wonder whether the Postmaster-General and the hon. the Minister would not consider reintroducing Sunday work of this nature, which would obviously have to be on an overtime basis. Equally obviously, it would have to be done voluntarily. I feel that there must be a proportion of skilled people in the Post Office who would, particularly on a voluntary basis, be prepared and happy to earn time and a half on Sundays, provided of course that there is no compulsion or duress involved at any time.

Talking of labour, I wonder whether the hon. the Minister can tell this Committee three things concerning non-White labour. Firstly, is he prepared to see more people of colour trained as technicians; if so, then secondly, are people with a sufficient standard of education available for such training, and thirdly, are the necessary training facilities, physical and human, in fact available? We know of office machinery firms in Johannesburg who are making very extensive use of Black mechanics for routine maintenance work and I believe that those mechanics are doing their work very satisfactorily and are giving satisfaction all round. Is it not possible to institute brief crash-training courses or programmes for Blacks to equip them to do maintenance work on telephones, much of which must be of a very elementary nature, and even some maintenance work on telex machines where such work is not too sophisticated? I am sure that there would be enough work on the Johannesburg railway station to occupy four of these people full-time throughout their lives. We know also that the shortage of technicians is going to grow very much worse in the coming 18 months because of the introduction of television. Clearly, the need to fill these gaps is very real indeed.

Finally, I should like to return to a subject on which I was able to touch only very briefly yesterday, viz. the very real shortage and desperate need of telephones in Soweto. This is a community officially estimated to number between 700 000 and 800 000 people, but everyone knows that the figure is very much closer to a million. I am told that there are only 714 private telephones serving this community of a million people, and this includes Government and municipal telephones. This is bad enough, but in addition there are only 32 public call-boxes in this vast area, which covers scores of square miles. One knows the problem in relation to call-box damage; it is mentioned in the Postmaster-General’s report. This is a very real problem. It is not a problem which by any means is confined to dominantly Black areas. Hooliganism is of course something which knows no race or colour barrier. In spite of this, however, one feels that it ought to be possible to install callboxes in an area of this nature where, I can assure the House, the need is really desperate. They should be set up at places where damage is least likely to occur. They could, perhaps, be installed in shops or cafés which keep late hours, or even on public property where supervision is feasible. Something must be done. We know the problems and we know of the shortage of staff. Somehow or other one feels that everything possible must be done to provide links between some at least of these people, of these million people who really need the service, and hospitals, doctors and the Police. The need for more private as well as public telephones in this African city, which is probably the largest Black city in Africa, is really compelling. I hope that the hon. the Minister and his staff will be able to give it some consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I think that I should reply at this juncture to what has been raised so far, and I should like to begin with the hon. member for Durban Point. The hon. member returned to the issue in regard to posts and persons. I think the best way in which we can deal with this is to do so on the basis of the Estimates themselves. If we glance at page 5 of the Estimates, then we take the figure given under the head “Salaries, Wages and Allowances”. The figure is in respect of this year for which we are now requesting the money. There we find a number, i.e. 65 744 persons, in respect of whom we now have to appropriate the money in these Estimates. I just want to elaborate a little on the point I made yesterday. This figure of 65 744 does not represent the number of posts. I told the House yesterday—I have the Hansard here if it is necessary to refer to it—that there are many non-Whites, specifically, who are not accounted for as such against the posts. The difference between the number of people which is given in the Estimates, viz. 65 744, and the number of posts which I mentioned, viz. 50 200, represents person who are not employed against these classified posts. I want to mention three examples in this regard. Take the case of messengers. Many of the Bantu messengers are not employed against a classified post. Much of the Black labour is not employed against classified posts. Many of the part-time workers are not in classified posts either. This explains the difference between the number 65 744, representing persons and that number 50 200, representing posts. Actually it is our business as a Committee to appropriate the amount of R151 million in order to pay these 65 744 people. That this number of people is employed against a total of 50 200 posts, is a departmental matter. With all due respect, it really has nothing to do with the question of appropriating money.

Look at page 13 of the Estimates. The number is given there.

Yes, that is correct. But turn over the page to page 15, the one is for the Whites and the other for the non-Whites.

But these are the posts. Page 13 contains particulars of the Whites, and page 15 particulars of the non-Whites.

Yes. I think we are having a little difficulty with the word “establishment”. This number, 50 200, represent the fixed establishment.

In your speech you referred to the “establishment”.

I concede that it could possibly have been a little confusing. In view of that we ought to express this position even more clearly next year, so that it is apparent that the number represents 50 200 persons on the fixed establishment. They are people on the fixed establishment. The number 65 000, which I gave hon. members, is the number of people who are in fact employed and whose salaries and wages we have to pay. [Interjection.] The hon. member may return to his matter; he said that he would like to discuss these figures. But these are the basic facts I have just given him here.

But these are misleading facts.

Sir, in view of my explanation, I do not know what is so misleading about this. If one finds satisfaction in anything that is misleading, one could look for it in these figures, but to me the position is as clear as crystal, in view of the explanation I have furnished here.

He will not understand it.

Sir, I shall now proceed to discuss the aspect of training which was raised by the first as well as by the last speaker. The hon. member for Durban Point asked what we were doing in regard to training. He felt that perhaps not enough was being done. In the first place, let me give the hon. member the over-all picture. I am referring firstly to the staff who are receiving technical training, for this is the sphere which is causing us the most concern. At present 1 488 Whites are being trained as technicians; 1 588 Whites are being trained as telephone electricians.

What is the duration of the course?

The duration of the courses is two years, three years, etc. Thirteen Blacks are being trained as technicians, and 29 as telephone electricians; ten Coloureds are being trained as technicians and 28 as telephone electricians; 12 Indians are being trained as technicians and 91 as telephone electricians. Sir, the hon. member for Parktown put three questions to me. His first was whether we were geared to training more non-Whites. The answer is yes, we are geared to training more non-Whites, subject to the conditions I mentioned here yesterday. The most important is that one must take one’s staff associations into consideration and go along with them. In the second place the hon. member asked whether there were sufficient non-Whites who qualified for training from a scholastic point of view. Yes, I think there are. Our various schools for these three groups are training a tremendous number. In fact, the fear is sometimes expressed that we might not have sufficient work for, say, the Std. X or Std. VIII Blacks or Indians; I cannot imagine that there will not be sufficient work. But the third question is whether we have sufficient training equipment. When we speak of equipment, we must not think only of the purely physical equipment; we must also think of the instructors who are required. These are in fact the two restrictions which determine our rate of training: The first is the attitude of our staff associations; the second is an adequate number of instructors whom we must have to train those non-Whites. One cannot simply press a button and have an adequate number of instructors. But I think that appreciable progress has been made in this regard, if one considers that 87 non-Whites have already been trained in technical and semi-technical fields. I think that the non-White manpower could be of great assistance to us.

†The hon. member for Parktown also wanted to know about the machinery for consultation and negotiation. etc., between the administration and the non-White staff. As far as the Coloureds are concerned, we have a Postal Workers’ Association, quite an active association. The next one is the Indian Postal Workers’ Association, and the Postmaster-General is going to open their annual congress in Durban. So the Coloureds and the Indians have their associations, which are parallel to the other four personnel unions I have referred to. As far as the Bantu are concerned, we have local liaison committees. We started with that some time ago and those liaison committees are working quite well. The hon. member referred to the strikes in Durban. Let me tell the hon. member, although you people do not like the word “instigator” or “agitators”, I’m afraid that that is the case here. According to all the knowledge we have there were instigators in the case of Durban. My own contention always is: Pay people a living wage and then there is little ground for the instigators. I think we have, in fact, increased their wages quite recently and according to my knowledge they are quite satisfied. These are the three different forms in which we have contact with these peoples.

*The hon. member for Bethlehem asked us to give preference to growth points and border industry areas. That is our policy. We are therefore giving preference to these two things. We would like to speed up our development of border industries for it is not proceeding as rapidly as one would like it to, and from our point of view this is being given preference, and therefore preference will be given to Harrismith, or whatever. The hon. member also discussed the matter of containerization for the conveyance of mail matter. This is a new development that one now finds, particularly among shipping companies. Various shipping companies which convey our own goods are still converting their ships into containerized ships, and as a Government we are co-operating with them. The same applies to the Post Office, which has a major contract for the conveyance of mail matter. But to apply it internally at this moment is I think being a little overhasty. It is a direction which I think is obvious. I want to in form the hon. member for Bethlehem that I think this is something which we will still come to. It is a useful method, but at this stage I think he is still being a little over-hasty with it.

The hon. member for Durban Central referred to the loss on postal services. I pointed out in my Budget Speech that the loss on postal services had decreased, and that we hoped to decrease it even further in the ensuing year. We are really hard at work reorganizing and improving our services so as to eliminate this loss on postal services. One does not always want to take a leaf from the book of overseas countries, for at times such a leaf is not very clear, as the following one turned out to be. It astonishes one, if one reads the postal services literature, whether it pertains to America, England or Italy, or any other country for that matter, to see what an absolute quagmire they find themselves in. Financially they are in a situation which is quite frightening. If one reads how, in certain European countries which I do not want to mention now for the sake of good manners, mail matter sometimes arrives three months late or not at all—some of it is simply stored in a warehouse and eventually destroyed—then I really think that things are going very well indeed with our postal services in South Africa. It is a Postal service which one may really feel happy about. The hon. member also spoke of how the Post Office should be a show window for the Government’s policy of apartheid. By implication the hon. member was actually advocating its disappearance. However, I want to give the hon. member a little word of warning. You know. Sir, he is skating on very thin ice. At the beginning of the year his former colleague, the hon. member for Florida—he used to sit more or less where he is sitting now—stood up here during the discussion of the Post Office Budget and advocated the abolition of apartheid measures in post offices. I then asked the hon. member, who was their secretary, to take this matter to the voters in the forthcoming election so that he could return with a mandate in this regard and say to me: “The voters of Florida have returned me with a large majority so that we can abolish apartheid in post offices.” Now, the question is this: Where is he? He is not here. Florida is now being represented in the person of a member of the National Party. Sir, hon. members may regard Durban Central as being very safe now, but I think there may perhaps be more than enough people who still regard the pattern of this country highly enough to adhere to it when things come to a head.

The hon. member raised the question of the officials. The officials, as I stated yesterday, are very satisfied with what has happened. I do not think they are disappointed, despite the fact that the hon. member himself said that they are disappointed with the Government which has been reelected. If that were true, then hon. members really need not blame us for it. The hon. member should rather have done what the hon. member for Durban Point promised they would do earlier this year. The other day Sir, I found it so very interesting when I came across the speech made on 7 February this year by the hon. member for Durban Point. I refer you to column 294 of the English Hansard. I want to quote the hon. member’s precise words, because one does not want to put words in someone else’s mouth. The hon. member said this—

He did mention the year. [Interjections.]

Sir, 24 April was the election date in this country. He was referring to that election, and not to an election in the year 2000. Therefore hon. members must not blame me or the officials. They should rather blame their own leaders who did not steer their party to victory.

The hon. member for Durbanville paid tribute to the service rendered by our 64 000 officials, particularly in times of storm damage. It is simply astonishing to see what our officials did during this time of storm damage. In this connection I should like to quote from Postel, echoing the appreciation expressed by the hon. member (translation)—

There were several examples of this, which I am not going to quote now, but which testify to the wonderful, loyal attitude of our Post Office officials. One can have only appreciation for this. It is well and good and fitting that we express that appreciation in that way in this House.

†The hon. member for Wynberg wanted to know what investments in the Post Office Savings Bank and National Savings Certificates would mature over the next five years. The particulars are as follows: In 1976 the first appreciable number of securities in which these monies are invested, at a face value of approximately R249 000, will mature. Securities valued at approximately R42 million will mature in 1978, at R23 million in 1979, and at R6,4 million in 1980. The total face value of these securities now held is R253 681 000. The last of these will only mature in 1998. The amount of R12,5 million, to be applied to capital expenditure from Savings Bank monies this year was available for the purpose because the amount was received in cash from the Treasury from the transfer of the Savings Bank to the Post Office. I hope this satisfies the hon. member.

*The hon. member for Parktown referred to the telephone services in Soweto. My notes are in Afrikaans, and I should like to use them. Three years ago we instituted an investigation in Soweto to establish the requirements there. As a result of this investigation, which was made with the cooperation of the Johannesburg City Council, it then appeared that the number of potential subscribers would be approximately 500. It did not remain at 500. There has since been a demand explosion, with the result that we are building exchanges there as rapidly as the need arises and the necessary staff allows. Particulars have already been furnished in reply to questions by the hon. member, but I may just add that and additional exchange is being planned at Naledi, but that the erection of this building has been delayed by the municipality. At present there are 1 513 applications. A considerable amount of cable work has recently been completed in this extensive area, and authorizations which will supply most of the waiting applicants with a service are now being issued. We are therefore hard at work on this matter, but I am afraid that the impression which one gained three years ago that only 500 services would have to be provided was a rather low estimate of the situation. What I have said so far covers the matters which have been raised up to now.

Mr. Chairman, I hasten to associate members on this side of the House with the tributes that have been paid by the Minister and the hon. member for Durbanville to the Post Office staff for the wonderful work that they did in the Western Cape, and particularly in the Peninsula, during the recent storms. To my knowledge they were able to keep essential services in working order and while there have been complaints of some areas that were without telephone services for some time. I nevertheless feel that on the whole they made a magnificent job under very difficult circumstances. We are very pleased to associate ourselves with the tributes that have been paid to them.

I propose to deal with a number of local matters and bring them to the attention of the hon. the Minister. They are local in the sense that they are apposite to my constituency, but at the same time they are also apposite to most constituencies of a similar nature to mine throughout the Republic. I think particularly of problems which are being experienced through the obtaining of wrong numbers. I think most people complain at one time or another that their telephone bills are very high. They say, for example, that this is due to the fact that they are being charged for an unnecessarily high proportion of wrong numbers obtained. I have noticed this particularly in the case of direct dialling. I have found that if one dials from Johannesburg to Cape Town or from Cape Town to one of the other cities, even if one takes the greatest care, one often gets a wrong number. I think this is something to which the Post Office must pay greater attention, because it involves a considerable amount of wasted expenditure on the part of the public.

I also want to mention to the hon. the Minister the fact that here in the Peninsula, in certain areas outside of the municipalities, areas I would call local board areas or village management board areas, there is a very high installation fee. A number of these areas are not very far from existing municipalities in the Peninsula. Prospective customers of the Post Office are required to pay something like R150 to R160 by way of an installation fee. I see the Postmaster-General shaking his head, but I have some information which, with the authority of the Minister, I could make available to him.

Another matter I want to mention is the possibility of providing a cheaper installation fee and a rental service for elderly people. There are a number of people who are entitled to obtain free radio licences, and I was wondering whether attention could be given to the possibility of giving the same people who obtain free radio licences, a reduced rental for their telephone services. Many of them are out of touch with their families and friends as a result of old age and can really not afford the installation fee plus the very high rental that has to be paid at the moment.

I would also like to deal with the matter of public telephones. I am now speaking particularly of telephones in the White. Coloured and the Bantu townships around the Peninsula. Reference has been made by other hon. members to the fact that there are insufficient public telephones to serve the townships. But then there are other public telephones which I feel should be brought to the attention of the Minister. It seems to me that too many of them go out of order too quickly. This is costing the public a lot of money in lost coins. I think, for example, of university hostels, I think of hospitals, nursing homes and other institutions of one kind or another. Invariably one has complaints from people who say that these telephones are frequently out of order. They put coins into the boxes and of course, they cannot get them back.

Not to mention airports and post offices.

I am coming to that. Then, Sir, there is the question of railway stations and post offices. I think it is the department’s policy to try to provide public telephones at railway stations and post offices, mainly for security reasons. It is evidently felt that they can best be kept in order if they are within the precincts of a Government building. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the time has not arisen, certainly in the big urban complexes, for there to be a daily or a weekly maintenance service for all the public telephone boxes, certainly those within reach of the main roads. I realize that it would be difficult to go frequently to some of the public telephone boxes in outlying areas, but in the urban complexes particularly in respect of telephone boxes at stations and at post offices, I believe there could be a very much more frequent and special maintenance service to ensure that those telephones, which are a vital necessity to the public at large, are kept in order. Then, as my friend the hon. member for Durban Point, says, you have the problem at the airports. I am thinking, in particular, of the D. F. Malan airport, where invariably one telephones after arriving by aeroplane and finds that the telephone is out of order and one also loses one’s coins. At the same time I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, that I think the department should be complimented on that excellent service that it provides to enable people travelling by plane to phone from one city to another to advise their families what times the planes are likely to arrive so that they can be met at the airport. This is a service that one can use for the princely sum of 20c. It is probably for a minute or two. I think it is an excellent service and I should like to compliment the department on it.

Now, Mr. Chairman. I come to the question of telephone services for new townships. If I may use my own area as an example, we have a township established at a place called Sun Valley. The township was established by the Divisional Council of the Cape. It is for White people. It is for people who are in the less privileged income groups. There must be hundreds of houses there at the moment. That township has been planned by one of the biggest local authorities here in the Cape, and yet hundreds of people are now living in that township with the absolute minimum of private lines and only one or two public telephone boxes. It seems to me there could be better planning between the local authorities, in particular, which establish these townships, and the department to ensure that before people go into their houses there are at least an adequate number of public telephone boxes available, and where possible a more adequate supply of private lines. The same applies, of course, to the Coloured people. At Kommetjie we have those people who have been moved from Simonstown and Kalk Bay to Ocean View. There you have a population at the moment. I guess, of about 5 000. They are there with the absolute minimum number of private lines. I do not think there can be more than the number of fingers on both my hands. There are two or three public telephone boxes and they are invariably out of order. And yet that is a community which has been moved from a town where they had all facilities like private lines and telephone boxes. They have been moved a long way away from the areas where they work. They have miles and miles to travel each day. It is very difficult indeed for them to keep in touch with doctors and other family members elsewhere in the Peninsula. I ask the Minister particularly to give his attention to these two townships that I have brought to his notice.

I now want to deal with what is somewhat commonly known as “junk mail”. In my opinion this is the unnecessary number of advertisements that ordinary householders receive through the post. It is to me absolutely incredible that each week one receives ten, fifteen or twenty letters of a commercial nature advertising goods of one kind or another. One has to open these envelopes because one does not know what is inside them. It might be something of importance. Invariably, having seen what is inside them, one throws them into the wastepaper basket. I wonder if the hon. the Minister cannot possibly consider that a special charge be laid on advertisers who advertise in this way through the post. I must confess that I hesitate in making this suggestion, because it is possible that the advertisers may then divert their attention to newspapers and there are some newspapers which I would not like to see receive very much more revenue than they are getting at the moment! However, it does seem to me that the public is being deluged with advertisements and it seems to be high time that advertisers pay some special premium.

I want to raise a matter which I think will enjoy the sympathy of most of the members of this Committee, and that is the question of sending political mail. I think that all of us who have taken part in elections recently will realize that it is a very expensive occupation. One of the most expensive items in the election accounts at the moment are the political pamphlets which one has to send out. Most politicians probably send out two mail issues and that accounts for the bulk of their election expenses. I wonder if the hon. the Minister cannot possibly, during election periods and by-election periods—I mean also provincial council elections, municipal elections and divisional council elections where they are applicable—make some concession during this particular period for political parties and individuals who are in fact involved in the democratic process. I should like to put that as a suggestion to the hon. the Minister.

In conclusion, I want to draw to the hon. the Minister’s attention the fact that the postal codes are causing confusion to a number of people where the names of various towns are able to be made into bilingual names. Let me give an example. You have an easy example in the case of Simonstown or Simonstad.

*It does not actually matter whether it appears in English or in Afrikaans, but in the case of Fish Hoek or Vishoek it does make a difference.

†Fish Hoek is after all an old traditional name. People do not know whether to look under “V” or “F” to find the code. Where you have such a case, you could put it under “F” as “Fish Hoek/Vishoek” and under “V” as “Vishoek/Fish Hoek”. I think this would eliminate a certain amount of confusion in the minds of the public. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, at first I wanted to congratulate the hon. member for Simonstown on his speech. It is not a maiden speech, however, but a first speech in this session. Normally the hon. member has never been a quiet member, and in fact, it amazed us that a number of debates had passed without his having broken his silence. I want to leave the matter at that, but I do want to say that we are pleased that he has broken his silence. We do not know what has happened in the meantime to have caused him to become so quiet, but I repeat that we are pleased that he has broken his silence.

The hon. member raised certain matters, and I want to agree in particular with one matter which he raised at the end of his speech. He spoke about the unnecessary mail we receive and which fills our post-boxes. However, I do not know what the hon. the Minister can do about it. Then, just in passing, he mentioned another matter to which I also want to refer. He referred to the vandalism, theft and destruction of Post Office property in the public telephone boxes. I read in a report that last year, for example, altogether 2 046 coin boxes were broken into in public telephone boxes throughout the country. It is estimated that coins to the value of R4 938 were stolen. Apart from that it cost the Post Office R1 170 to replace or repair the damaged telephone apparati in the 1973-’74 financial year. In his Second Reading speech, on other occasions and in his recent reply, too, the hon. the Minister expressed his appreciation of the staff at all levels and in all branches for the valuable work they are doing and for the dedicated and self-sacrificing task they are performing. In addition, that tribute has been paid by both sides of the House, and I should like to associate myself with it. I also want to emphasize that the staff of the Post Office displays a hard-working and responsible spirit which leads to the highest possible productivity. Measured against standards outside the Post Office itself, the Post Office officials’ output of work is exceptionally high and the Post Office official is a very sought-after employee in both the open labour market and the closed field of employment of the Post Office. That, too, is why so many of the Post Office officials are enticed elsewhere.

Loyalty is another outstanding characteristic of the Post Office staff.

Not only do the various staff associations of the Post Office co-operate harmoniously with the Minister, the Postmaster-General and the management, but in addition, through their mouthpieces, the monthly periodicals, they regularly foster greater productivity, loyalty and dutifulness among their members. They thereby perform an invaluable service to the Post Office as such and to the country as a whole. There are the following staff associations, among others: The Post and Telegraph Association of South Africa, the South African Telecommunication Association, the South African Postal Association, the Association of Post Office Engineers and also the two non-White associations to which the hon. the Minister referred, namely the Coloured Postal Workers Association and the Indian Postal Workers Association. The first-mentioned three associations for Whites also have their mouthpieces in the form of monthly periodicals. I had the privilege over the past few weeks of receiving and inspecting copies of the various monthly periodicals. I found it very striking that the editors were constantly fostering greater productivity and willingness among their members. In the June edition of the Posts and Telegraphs Herald, the official organ of the Posts and Telegraphs Association of South Africa, I read, among other things, this call by the editor to his readers—and we know that the written word is very effective (translation)—

I also received the August 1974 edition of the Live Wire, the monthly periodical of the South African Telecommunications Association. In it the editor mentions to his readers what return the employer may reasonably expect in exchange for his remuneration of his employees. Among other things, he mentions the following considerations (translation)—

This fine appeal is concluded with the following question (translation)—

I think that is a splendid encouragement and splendidly put. One last quotation testifying to their sound attitude, comes from the editor of Die Posjoernaal, which is also issued in English. The English equivalent is The Postal Journal. This is the official organ of the South African Postal Association. In the June edition this year—let me emphasize that this, therefore, appeared before the new salary structure or salary increase for postal workers was announced—the editor writes, among other things, the following—

I emphasize that this is an exceptionally sound attitude. It is very highly appreciated. This idea of co-operation which the Post Office has had from its staff associations at various levels, is extremely significant. It is particularly important for the progress of the Post Office. On various occasions the hon. the Minister has pointed out how he has had the co-operation of the associations in taking various steps in regard to the training and employment of non-Whites at various levels. That is why I should like to thank in these few brief thoughts, not only the staff associations, the staff as such, but also the editors of those periodicals, the monthly periodicals, which influence their readers through the written word.

Mr. Chairman, let me say at the outset that at the beginning of this discussion I found myself in a state of bewilderment. I was not quite sure as to my emotions. I make no bones about the fact that I am being sarcastic when I say that the hon. the Minister obviously has, as his prime virtue, modesty. His modesty is quite endearing and his self-control while his colleagues on the other side of this House heap praize on his head, is quite fantastic to behold. This admirable character trait was displayed abundantly during the introduction of this Bill and again about half an hour ago. I am sure that even the most hardened heart must have melted and gone out to him.

I wish to deal with one of his heartrending claims—his spontaneous and immediate response to the Government’s call in respect of fuel conservation. His moving words in this regard are recorded. Permit me to quote him this regard. In his Budget speech the hon. the Minister stated—

No doubt, the call of the Kruithoring—

The hon. the Minister mentions “every conservation measure imaginable”, and I want to repeat the word “imaginable”. I commend the hon. the Minister for possessing such a vivid imagination. He is imagining things if he feels that anything other than a normal measure in the form of speed restrictions resulted in this 20% saving per month in fuel consumption. He is imagining things if he feels that his department has done any better than any commercial concern. He is imagining things if he feels that his department has done any better than any private individual. He also talks of the growth of the fleet. What growth? He contradicts himself. Later on in his Budget speech he referred to the department’s computer. In this regard he said—

This Budget speech may, of course, be another piece of Africana such as was referred to by the hon. member for Constantia. The 7 000 vehicles applicable in October 1973 are apparently still applicable as at this date. Permit me to advise the hon. the Minister that fuel savings of 20% are the rule and not the exception as a result of speed restrictions. Speed restrictions alone can achieve this and I suggest that with a little more effort, over and above the noble and exemplary ones claimed by the hon. the Minister, the department could really come up with a far better result. Permit me also illustrate my point with some figures. These are figures obtained as a result of tests conducted on a range of passenger saloon motor cars of varying engine capacities. I am going to use miles per gallon because, quite frankly, I would need to go back to school to understand litres per kilometre and I think there are many hon. members here who find themselves in the same unfortunate position. [Interjection.] I can give the hon. member these in kilometres per litre, but he would not understand them. A vehicle with an engine capacity of 1 300 cc. at 80 km per hour will give you 45 miles per gallon; at 56 km per hour 53 miles per gallon, a saving of 15,1%. A 1 600 cc. at similar speeds will save 14,3% and a 3-litre vehicle 12,5%. Sir, there is no point scored there, but please bear with me. The above figures are applicable, I say, to vehicles operating in urban areas. Let us look at the rural areas; let us look at our highways; let us look at what happens when we get onto the open road; then your 1 300 cc. vehicle will give you a saving of 22,2%, your 1 600 cc. vehicle a saving of 25% and your 3-litre vehicle a saving of 28,5%. This is a somewhat different pattern. Sir, here we have a reverse process, and please remember that I am quoting figures in respect of passenger vehicles of up to 3 litres. Sir, imagine the effect of larger engine units. If we collate the figures I have quoted, we find that in the case of the small vehicle there is an overall saving of 18.65%, a saving which is due to just one factor, namely speed; in the case of the 1 600 cc. vehicle there is a saving of 19,65%, and in the case of the 3-litre vehicle a saving of 20,5%. Sir, to the hon. the Minister I say: “You have only done your duty and for that I commend you and your department in all sincerity. You have not, however, achieved any great heights, and if you claim that these are great heights, then just whom do you think you are kidding?”

I would like now to move on to another item that disturbs me somewhat. I have read with great interest the Minister’s remarks and intentions in regard to party line services. I do not believe that a party line is a service. I believe a party line is an iniguitous imposition that no modern society should have to suffer. The hon. the Minister says in his Budget speech that automation is on the way. He further refers to the automation of all exchanges as being part of his long-term plan. Sir, what lovely terminology—“long-term planning”! Just how long? Perhaps the Minister would care to give this Committee a more concrete idea of the time required ...

Whom are you quoting?

I am quoting the hon. the Minister. I think, however, that I can identify the Minister’s problem in this regard. He himself mentioned it. It is the shortage of labour, particularly of trained technicians. Am I correct in that. Sir? I think the hon. the Minister agrees with me and I thank him for agreeing with me, but then I say to him: Why then do you initiate this new individual party-line service in Tzaneen? Sir. I have got nothing against Tzaneen, nothing whatsoever, but I feel that I have got a far stronger case for the initiation of this service in the following places, of which I am sure not one hon. member on the other side has ever heard: Darnall, Kearsney, Stanger, Umhlali, Ballitoville. Tongaat, Desainagar, Verulam, Umdloti, Mt. Edgecombe, Doringkop, Frasers. Glenmill. Ndwedwe. Sir, I want to say to hon. members opposite, “Julie moet wakker skrik”, because these 14 exchanges serve party lines in the coastal strip from Umhlanga Rocks in the south to the Tugela River in the north, a strip of some 65 km in length and some 17½ km at its widest point. Sir, that is 1 137,5 square km. This means one exchange for every 81,3 square km. Draw a symmetrical pattern and all you have to do is to go 5½ miles and you will find an exchange, and they all have party lines tacked on to them.

Did you pick him out, Vause?

Oh no, I did it on my own, my friend. Now, this area I have referred to is an industrial area; It is industrial in the true sense of the word. It is industrial because it produces sugar. Sugar, its planting, its growing, its milling and its refining, is an industrial process which requires the highest standard of communication at all levels. Its contribution to our national economy demands it. Furthermore, I can assure the hon. the Minister that subscribers in these areas would be quite prepared to pay the tariffs envisaged for this automatic service of which he has spoken. Now, in this area we have a community that is crying out for job opportunities, such as those offered in the field of technicians and telephone electricians. I am referring, Sir, to our Asiatics. The Asiatic is available, is adaptable and is eager to have a trade. As witness to this, Sir. I would refer to the increasing numbers being trained and those who have already qualified as efficient and skilled motor mechanics, sheet metal workers, welders, body builders—to name but a few. The scope is enormous and the abilities of our South African Asiatics are without question. Why then are there only 70 undergoing training now? The Minister told us a few minutes ago that this figure is now 103,—12 technical and 91 electricians—who are undergoing training. Why not 200. 300 or 400? Here is a golden opportunity for the hon. the Minister to really achieve something of note. Train Asiatics in the field under discussion and automate the antiquated exchanges serving a modern and highly specialized and concentrated area on the Natal north coast. [Time expired.]

The hon. member who has just resumed his seat, is still a new member of this House. I think, then, that it is fitting that we give him some very good advice and that is that he will learn that even in this place, humility is a trait which impresses a great deal, but such a bombastic, swaggering attitude as he displayed today, and for which he has already become known does not. And while I am dealing with him, I just want to say that he has made a name for himself here not only for being very cocky when he speaks, but for displaying another trait as well.

Order! The hon. member must not be personal.

Very well, if that is your ruling, Sir. I just wanted to say that we shall turn over his page for him.

Sir, there are a few matters which I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The hon. the Minister will remember that while dealing with his Vote on another occasion earlier this year, we appealed to him to consider using woman power in the Post Office to a greater extent. I find it interesting, then, to read in the annual report that there has been an increase in the number of women employed by the Post Office. I find the following particularly interesting—

Today I want to repeat my plea for women to be employed not only in everyday technical fields, but that real consideration be given to the training of women as fully-fledged artisans. I think that in that sphere in particular, the serious shortage that exists could be relieved considerably. I can give the hon. the Minister the assurance that it has been my experience in practice that there is a considerable number of women who would like to make use of such an opportunity if such facilities were to be made available to them.

Since I am now dealing with the question of staff, I cannot let the opportunity go by without conveying a word of special thanks to the hon. the Minister and his department for the increase in the bursary fund which has been made available by the Post Office. I am convinced that this increase will foster new interest in the utilization of those bursaries, and I should like to convey my sincere thanks to the hon. the Minister and his department for this.

Now it is true that in the same breath one can say a few words about the question of recruitment by the Post Office. Sometimes I get the impression, judging, too, from discussions with headmasters, etc., that a great deal more could be done to make a more dynamic recruitment campaign possible, particularly at our schools. It is a question of a lack of knowledge of the various fields which the Post Office offers to our young people. If the children are not furnished with that information, they cannot consider entering those fields.

Sir, when it comes to expressions of thanks, I want to associate myself with the hon. member for Durban Point who started his speech the other day by mentioning the excellent service given to the various parties by the telephone department, particularly during the election. I want to associate myself with that, and say how much we appreciate the fact that the Post Office, and the telephone department in particular, have always been prepared to meet us half-way. In my own case there was a request to transfer a telephone from one office to another. That same afternoon, even before we were prepared for it, the Post Office was ready to do it for us. That is excellent service which really deserves the high respect of all of us. Coming from the East Rand, I also want to thank the manager of the Telephone Department and his staff in Johannesburg, for the assistance, they gave us under very difficult circumstances. I can tell you, Sir, that there were a number of bottlenecks which had to be solved from time to time. Up to now it has never been necessary to be really critical, because these people go out of their way to assist one.

But, Sir, having said that, I must also, in the nature of things, get a little nearer home and speak about certain needs in my own constituency. I want to point out to the hon. the Minister that provision is being made in the Budget for the construction of various exchanges in our area. I immediately want to remind the hon. the Minister that Springs is the capital of the Eastern Transvaal and the East Rand. It is therefore fitting that on this level, too, this city should be properly catered for. However, it is true that although the building for the main exchange, which is under construction in Springs at the moment, is almost completed, we have been told that as the result of technical delays, it will not be possible to put the exchange itself into operation within a short time. In order to serve the interests of the whole East Rand, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether the completion of that main exchange could not be expedited. In the same breath I want to refer to the main Post Office which is to be erected alongside the main exchange.

Sir, we know that the building is on the drawing boards. We know that the site is being prepared at the moment for the eventual construction of that main post office, but there is no provision in this Budget for making a start on the erection of this building. Because it has become an urgent necessity for various reasons, I should like to ask the hon. the Minister that the construction of that main post office be given some impetus if at all possible. But because a main post office is going to be built, another building is going to fall vacant shortly when the post office is transferred. I should now like to ask the hon. the Minister in this regard whether consideration could not be given to setting aside a part of the old building, particularly in view of its situation, in order that it may be turned into a museum. I ask this for two reasons.

In the first place I believe that while Springs is a central point for a large area, if a museum could be established, young people and schools would like to make use of the opportunity to view it. It could serve as a stimulus to interest more people in the activities of the Post Office. In the second place that old building, which is still a very useful building, will not eventually stand empty or have to be used for other purposes. It will continue to serve a very useful purpose. I wonder whether the hon. the Minister could not give a little attention to this matter. Lastly, while there are still substantial shortages of telephone services, in our area, I want to ask whether there is not perhaps also a possibility of effecting interim measures to allow greater utilization of mobile exchanges. My impression is that these mobile exchanges could serve as an aid to ease the demand. In my constituency there is an urgent need for telephone services, and I wonder, therefore, whether the hon. the Minister could not perhaps give attention to that too. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Springs, who has just sat down, must forgive me for not dealing with the subjects he has been discussing. Understandably he has been discussing local matters which concern his area.

Coming from the Eastern Cape, an area which has often been mentioned here as being one of the large growth points in the country and where border development is continuing, I am very disappointed to see that of the total capital expenditure of R153 617 000 on telecommunications only R10 775 000 will be spent in the Eastern Cape. It is only two years ago that I raised the point in this House that the large Bantu township such as Mdantsane, outside East London, with a population of 340 000 Blacks was served by only one telephone. I must admit that the position has improved remarkably since then, thanks to the department, and I do appreciate the effort the department has put into it.

There are two now.

My colleague says there are now two telephones. The position, however, has improved. In Mdantsane we now have a post office as well, for which we are very grateful. However, here we have an area, a potential growth point, where we should plan for the future in regard to telecommunications. In this Budget we will, however, only receive for the whole of the Eastern Cape region a little over R10 million. This does not only disappoint me, but will also disappoint all those people who are working so hard to develop that area, especially in the border areas.

Another matter which I must say disappoints me too is that in the latest report of the department nowhere is it mentioned what the telephone backlog in actual fact is in the different regions. This used to be so. We have found it in previous reports. But I am very sorry to see that it has been left out from this latest report, Mr. Chairman. It is something I hope the Minister and the department will consider in the future. We would like to see how the backlog affects every region in our country.

I believe that we on this side have much to be grateful for when it comes to the department. I believe they have a very unenviable task. I often wonder how they are able to carry out their duties effectively in South Africa. When one considers, Mr. Chairman, that for a quarter of a century now, the Department of Posts and Telecommunications has been handicapped, has been hamstrung by virtue of the fact that they have had to carry out their duties to the best of their ability under this Government’s labour policies and ideological policies, it is a miracle that the department has succeeded as well as it has in the past quarter of a century.

The Minister mentioned in his Budget Speech that the Government, or the department at least, is now going flat out in the training of personnel, the training of technicians. In fact he has mentioned—and I see from the latest report—something which is very significant. Formal training for our non-White people will be starting in 1974. But even the figures the hon. the Minister gave us here this afternoon, leave much to be desired. I believe that if the Government want to take up this matter seriously, the Government will have to do far more than has been contemplated for the next 12 months. Training, of course, has commenced in Umtata and in Johannesburg. If one thinks that there are far more than 2 000 Whites being trained as technicians in different spheres, the number of our non-Whites is negligible at this stage. On 21 November 1973, the hon. the Minister announced that the department would open a regional office in the Transkei. I now want to come back to my point, that few people in South Africa realize or appreciate what the department is doing for the public in South Africa. Few people appreciate or realize, too, how hampered the department has been under Government policy.

I just want to mention one incident which took place in the Eastern Cape to show hon. members under what difficulties our officials in the department have to work. On 1 April this year, under unpleasant conditions—it was raining and extremely cold—an assistant control official and three clerks arrived in Umtata from the telephone section in Port Elizabeth without any office furniture. They did not have any equipment at all. They were there to occupy five of the seven offices and had to start a regional office as was the hon. the Minister’s intention. Had it not been for the South African Police who were occupying the first floor of that building and who gave each one of the clerks an empty packing crate to use as a desk they would not have had any furniture. A week later the desks arrive and the week after that one steel cabinet arrived from Port Elizabeth. This meant that they could only then start unpacking their supplies, their registers, etc.

Is this the greatest contribution you can make?

I shall be coming to my point just now. I am trying to explain to this hon. member under what difficult circumstances our officials have to work, but he does not appreciate it and does not want to hear it. All he can do is to say “Dankie, agb. Minister” every time he speaks in this House. The irony of the situation is that well over two months later they still did not have a rubber stamp in their office, not to mention all the other items of furniture required.

Only red tape.

They had one typewriter, but no typist and no messenger. I could tell hon. members of many other items which they did not have. Then, one day, after having settled in this office, these clerks received a circular in the post, circular No. 670/74, wherein the Department of Telecommunications was asking for candidates from other sections to apply for the posts newly created in the regional office in Umtata. These officials had settled in at long last under great difficulties only to find that the posts were now being advertised as being vacant. The moral of the story is that we find settled there one assistant control official and three clerks occupying an office which in fact is not there, and has never been there according to the Government. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat must excuse me if I do not react to all his arguments. As a matter of fact there was a great deal about which he was disappointed. There is every reason to sympathize with him, because his party as such has as many things to be disappointed about. To be sure, he was also grateful in some respects, and one does have some respect for his realizing at least that in this country in which he is living under a Nationalist Government, there is certainly a great deal to be grateful for.

The criticism of this Budget which we have had for the past day or two, centered chiefly on the telephone services. By now we are used to this criticism. As usual, too, it was extremely negative in spite of the fact that this Budget is one of the masterpieces of the National Party and of the Post Office. More than anything else, this Budget has brought the frustrations of the Opposition to the surface. One could almost say of the hon. member for Durban Point that his frustrations reached breaking point.

I should like to dwell for a moment on the criticism that has been levelled at the telephone services. In spite of the millions of rands which have been pumped into the telephone service in recent times, we still have a backlog and we are aware of this. In the constituency which I represent, too, that aspect is very much present and we have to cope with that problem every day. What is the origin of the problem? It is very clear that this problem arises out of the fact that the whole system is overloaded for the very reason that we make telephones available to our people, something to which I have no objection. But the result is that the service which results from this, is a poorer one than it might be. The second reason is that we are unable to supply telephones to everyone who wants them at any given time. A third reason for the problem is that when one dials, one does not always achieve the desired result. To me the question is, what has caused this situation. It is ascribable to the fact that for a long period, the postal administration had to cope with a serious shortage of finance. This aspect has been solved to a large extent and one is very grateful that in that sphere, matters are progressing far more favourably. It is also ascribable to a second vital factor, namely that we have to cope with an enormous programme of expansion in our country, a programme of expansion for which the Nationalist Government ought to receive the congratulations of that side of the House, because it is expansion and prosperity created by the National Party from which members on that side and their followers derive many benefits. As a result of this we have a system today which is overloaded. The most important reason, however, arises out of the serious shortage of trained technicians, electronic technicians, mechanics, electricians, cable jointers and others. Immediately, the question of why we are experiencing this shortage springs to mind. This shortage is being experienced because these people are scarce, because it takes a long time to train them and because such training is an expensive process. What is being done to solve this problem? The major and successful training programme which has already been put into effect in order to train Whites and non-Whites, Indians and others in order to contend with that shortage, has as has been dealt with in detail here. Consequently I shall not dwell on this training programme. It has been pointed out that we have undertaken an extensive overseas recruitment programme which has already been crowned with a reasonable degree of success. We have also heard today that we are making use of women to perform very important work in this respect. Much of this work is also done under contract by other organizations in order to relieve the burden on the Post Office.

The problem is that our staff is being drained by resignations. I have reports here indicating how many people have resigned in the course of one month, but I do not want to go into detail now. The question that occurs to me is why this is the case. It is mainly the industries who entice these highly sophisticated people away from the Post Office. The industries in the Republic offer opportunities in many spheres to this trained staff and now they are engaged in enticing these people away from us. Because these people are so well trained, and owing to the fact that the training that is offered, is so thorough, the Post Office is the victim of that process of enticement today. In the nature of the matter these industries can pay more because they do not have to incur the heavy expense of training these people. It is calculated that it costs R10 000 to train one person properly. Now the question is: What can we do to solve this problem? Today, in all humility, I want to bring a few ideas to the attention of the hon. the Minister to see whether we could not help to solve this problem in this regard. I want to begin by making an earnest plea to our people. The people of our country are patriots, our people are patriotically inclined and have the interests of South Africa at heart. I therefore believe that, just as we held a water year and appealed to the public to help us to conserve water when we were experiencing a water emergency, we can now go to the public and ask them to help us not to make unnecessary demands on the Post Office because this only aggravates their problems. My proposal is, briefly, that we should ask the public to stop making unnecessary telephone calls and to avoid telephone calls during the peak periods as far as possible, not to hold long conversations, not to allow social conversations to take place during the peak periods, to lock telephones if they do not have control over them at certain times of the day, only to ask for a telephone if it is really essential and if they cannot get along without it, and to make more use of public telephones in spite of the problems which do, I know, exist in that regard. I believe, too, that as far as that is concerned we can appeal to our people to handle our public telephones with more respect. I also want to suggest that we print slogans on our postal articles and envelopes by means of the machines available to us in order to bring this problem to the attention of our people too.

In dealing with the question of the staff shortage, to me the question is: “What can we do?” I think the first thing we can do, is to convey our thanks to the staff, that section of the staff which has stayed and is still in the employment of the Post Office today while others have been lured away. We should convey our thanks to them for the dedication and the loyalty which they have displayed. Extremely high demands are made of these people. We have heard a number of examples of this today. I have been told that during the recent rainy season in the Transvaal, as many as 8 000 faults per day were reported. A number of them, of course, were repetitions from the previous day, but this just shows the enormous pressure to which these people are subjected and I think that we should show them the necessary gratitude. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to reply to the various matters which have been raised. I want to begin by dealing with a matter which was raised yesterday afternoon.

†The hon. member for Constantia raised a few points. I did not cover everything in my reply. I think there is one point which he raised in regard to the financing of the Post Office to which I should like to reply now.

As far as the nature of the financing system of the Post Office is concerned I think there is one matter on which we must have absolute clarity. I also received a deputation from Assocom the other day and they raised the same point. This was the point in regard to the question of the 50% of our contributions. I had to explain the position to them and I should like to explain it now to the hon. member for Constantia as well. Assocom, as is the hon. member for Constantia, was mistakenly under the impression as far as this question of financing is concerned that the 50% was meant to imply 50% from own sources after provision had been made for depreciation. This is not the case. Since the depreciation provision is ploughed back directly into capital works it is regarded as part of the 50%. For the past two years it boils down to the fact that the degree of self-financing of the capital programme purely from profits was 14,88% in respect of 1973-’74 and is 13,65% in respect of the present financial year. This was explained to Assocom; they accepted it in this light and I hope the hon. member will also do so.

Could I ask the hon. the Minister how he intends treating funds generated by the Post Office Savings Bank; whether they are going to be treated as loan capital or whether they will be treated as internally-generated funds?

Sir, I would like to reply to that question in my Third Reading speech when I will come back to the Savings Bank.

Mr. Chairman, I come now to the hon. members who spoke here this afternoon. The hon. member for Simonstown raised quite a few points. He started off with the question of wrong numbers. I admit that even I get a wrong number now and then. The primary cause, of course, is the overloading of the system, and the question is how to rectify this situation, be cause it is quite annoying to get wrong numbers, I think the solution is the expansion of the system. I think the extra amount which we are asking hon. members to vote for expansion purposes will go a long way towards alleviating the position and obviating annoyance caused to people by getting the wrong numbers.

Will you explain how you are going to do it with a 9% capital increase?

The efficiency of our staff will make this possible. The hon. member will be able to check up on this in a year’s time, and I hope that he will then also be able to express more thanks for what has been done in this regard.

The other point raised by the hon. member was the question of the high installation fee in his area. I presume that he was referring to services which fall outside the minimum rental zones. Those fees are higher. They are, of course, related to the high cost of providing the service. I am afraid that if people go and live outside of the minimum rental zones and want this service, they will unfortunately have to pay the higher rental. We as a department cannot carry the higher cost; it would be unreasonable to other users of the telephone system. The hon. member also made an appeal on behalf of old people for free rental or for a reduced rental. Sir, this is a plea which we get quite often, especially at congresses. Delegates ask for this at my own congresses from time to time. Sir, we are in a difficult position in this regard because we have no statutory authority to differentiate between people on the ground of age or sickness. We cannot help these people unless Parliament amends the law and that, of course, is something which Parliament itself can consider. At the moment I am bound by the Act as it stands.

The hon. member also referred to the question of public telephones in Coloured townships. He says that these public telephones are very often out of order. Sir, that is so. This falls in the same class as the wrong numbers that one gets occasionally, the difference in this case being that we suffer considerable damage to our equipment as a result of this vandalism. Last year it cost us R171 000. In this case, too, I am afraid there is no quick solution, but the solution that we have in mind is to instal more table telephone models in shops and other buildings. The people in those shops or buildings could then keep an eye on these telephones. We will shortly start installing such table models in the Peninsula on quite a large scale. As a matter of fact, we are busy installing the necessary exchange equipment at the moment to make this possible.

Regarding the question of new townships, we do our best to provide facilities wherever the need exists and where we are able to accommodate the inhabitants of those townships, we do so. We are in constant consultation with the local authorities in this regard to have an idea of what the development plans for the townships are. We are doing what we can. As far as Sun Valley is concerned, we will look into that matter and see what can be done in that respect.

Also Ocean View.

Yes, very well.

The hon. member also referred to “junk mail”. I am not very fond of this expression at all. In fact, it is really the mail order houses that have the greatest objections and I think one has to appreciate their objections. By the way, we get a few cents out of that “junk mail”. Although we may describe it as “junk mail” and do not like it in our post boxes, the Post Office gets quite an income out of it. But I will accept the hon. member’s argument in this regard and when we come to draw up new tariffs again—I sense that hon. members feel it should come at some time or other—then we will certainly consider this question. They call it “uneconomical” mail, so if we can drop the word “junk” and use this word, I think the mail order houses will be quite happy about it. But in any case, when we come to draw up new tariffs again at some time or other, we will certainly pay attention to this question.

The hon. member also raised the question of political mail. We all belong to political parties, and with inflation even the political parties have quite a job to pay their accounts.

Except the Progs.

There may be an exception. In the near future we may get some more clarity, but perhaps this is not the moment to discuss that. But I think those parties who really feel the pinch will have to adapt themselves. That applies to my party, and being connected to my party’s information division, I am afraid we will have to adapt, because our party does not have unlimited funds. Those who do not have unlimited funds will have to cut down on the number of pamphlets and brochures or whatever we issue, but to expect the Post Office to cut down on the tariffs on this mail is I think asking too much.

The hon. member for Umhlanga had quite a speech to make. The only thing I would like to say is that in so far as the growth of the transport fleet is concerned, the position is that since October 1973 the transport fleet has grown by 4,7%. I hope the hon. member will be very happy about that.

*The hon. member for Springs spoke about the utilization of ladies in the technical field. We have been giving attention to this matter for quite some time, and I may just say that we have 1 100 trained ladies in our employ as female technical assistants at present. This year we started with the training of ladies as technicians, and 11 of them are receiving such training at present. So we are making some progress in this regard as well. The hon. member also referred to the automatic exchange. In fact, almost 30% of the construction work has already been completed. The expected date of completion is 1975. I am afraid we cannot complete this exchange any sooner because the installation of the equipment will also take some time. The new post office will be completed in December 1979. This will afford the hon. member sufficient time to make arrangements for the inaugural ceremonies.

With regard to the representations he made for a museum to be established there, I am afraid that we cannot consider this matter. We are now going to make arrangements to establish the first Post Office museum in Pretoria. A museum is not something one can have just anywhere; one cannot have a museum at every place, because then Alberton will also want to have one. This kind of thing simply cannot work. I am afraid we cannot establish Post Office museums at places other than in Pretoria.

The hon. member also made representations in connection with mobile exchanges. There is quite a lot to be said for them. Various countries have something of this nature. When visiting Israel a number of years ago, I saw with what effect they were using mobile exchanges there. We are also using them, but the fact of the matter is that this kind of thing also has many limitations. One cannot use them just anywhere. However, I want to assure the hon. member that we shall make use of them wherever it is practical to do so.

†The hon. member for East London North had something to say about the sums of money spent in the Eastern Province and referred to an amount of R10 million which is being set aside for the Eastern Cape. I am sorry, but I do not know where the hon. member gets this figure. Only building projects are mentioned individually and other capital works like equipment, cables, etc., are provided for globally. I am afraid that I do not know how the hon. member has arrived at this figure.

As far as the question of the waiting list is concerned, the backlog is no longer shown separately for different regions, but I think it will be useful for us in our discussions in Committee if it can be shown separately. My department will see to it that in future figures will be shown separately.

*The hon. member for Kempton Park pleaded that greater use be made of slogans in call-boxes in order to draw the attention of the public to certain aspects of the use of a telephone. This is definitely a very deserving thought and my department will give the necessary attention to this matter.

Schedules agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Mr. Speaker, I must say that the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications seems to have a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde personality vis-à-vis the hon. the Minister of Labour. I have not seen him in this role of sweet reasonableness and courteous attention to speeches in his other mantle of Minister of Labour. I hope that this will be a permanent change for the better.

I want to deal immediately with a matter to which the hon. the Minister replied towards the end of his speech where he said that political parties which did not belong to any of the super de luxe financial groups would just have to adjust themselves to sending out less posted matter. I can think of an answer even better than that. I think he should consult with his colleague, the Minister of National Education, so as to make the radio and television equipment which he controls available to politicians, as any democratic country in the world does, in order to give them the opportunity to put across their message to the electorate through the medium of the radio and television. This is a matter which we shall pursue in due course. This, I believe, is the answer rather than the high postage which we shall have to pay.

I want to come back to the staff issue and say to the hon. the Minister that when I was quibbling over figures with him, it was not that I was simply trying to score a mathematical debating point. I was trying to establish facts, because I believe that this is not just a question of how many people in the department are on the establishment and how many are employed. I believe it is a question of approach towards the employees of the department. What we have now established is that 14 500 of the Brown and Black employees of the Post Office, although catered for in the Budget, are not on the establishment of the Post Office. In other words, they are not regarded as permanent employees for whom posts are created in the structure of the Postal Administration. On the Whites side, similarly, about 1 500 people are not regarded as being permanent, catered for and incorporated in the establishment. This is the point I wanted to make by establishing the figures and it has taken me three Readings to get to this point. If you are to employ people and if they are to become part of a working team, then surely they become part of your establishment. When one looks at the position one finds that there has been a net increase in the number of White employees of only 90 from last year to the current year. When you look at the figures for non-Whites you see that there has been a growth of 700. In other words, these people are permanently employed. They are not just a temporary phenomenon, but are part of the operation of the Post Office. They will be required next year and in the years thereafter, but the fact that they do not appear as part of the establishment shows the psychology of the hon. the Minister and his Government’s thinking towards the non-White employees with whom we are dealing. The figures are important only in so far as they relate to that conclusion to which I was working, because it makes a difference if you take the departmental figure, which does have these people on the establishment. This is important, that the department considers them as being on the establishment and quotes them as being on the establishment in their preparation of estimates. They call it the establishment, the “diensstaat”, and in the Vote we vote money for those posts, but in the hon. the Minister’s speech, the speech of the political head of the department, they disappear and they become non-things, non-people, because they are not on the establishment and are only employed. This is something which we must improve in the thinking of the hon. the Minister. It is not applicable to the department, because they accept them and include them on the establishment. The Minister must start to think in terms of 23 000 Brown and Black people working in the department as part of the department and not of 8 000 people, as he said in his speech, and 14 000 hangers-on. They are all part of the team without which he cannot operate and manage his department. They are part of the growing team which he will have to use in all fields. I wish the hon. member for Waterberg was here. I would ask him, or perhaps the hon. Minister of the Interior: Would he object if his telephone was out of order and an Asian technician went and soldered the joint that put it back into operation? He would not ask as long as his telephone worked. Would he object if he got through to an exchange and the accent on the other end of the telephone line was perhaps not the kind of accent he usually hears? We do not all speak with the correct accents as it is. And there is often thousands of miles of wire or air to disinfect the voice. This cannot hurt anyone. That is why I say, Mr. Speaker, that we must stop thinking in terms of 8 000 posts in his department. We must think in terms of 23 000 units who are part of the machinery of the Post Office.

Now let me deal for a moment, too, with this miracle that is going to occur. The hon. the Minister says we must just trust his staff; with an increase of 9% capital they will produce the goods. I have no doubt they will. They will do the best they possibly can. But I have now twice tried to get an answer out of him. How, with a 10% plus inflation rate, can you plan for increased growth if you are only voting 9% additional capital resources? It is as simple as that. And the Minister must not simply say they will do the job. This means that we will absorb inflation and that a little more of last year’s carry-over to this year will be carried over to 1975-’76. It is simple arithmetic. If you are only spending 9% more on telecommunications capital, and inflation takes up 10% or 12%, you cannot expand the rate of growth. Words are not going to do it. Dedication is not going to do it. We are talking of cash—rand and cents. This is the issue which the hon. the Minister has not yet explained to this House.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity, on the Third Reading, since I have perhaps criticized during the other Readings, of making one or two practical suggestions to the hon. the Minister. I think these suggestions may assist him. He dealt with maintenance. The hon. the Minister did not reply to my question about where one got friction if one used contractors. One of the suggestions I want to ask him to consider is to have a team which can be air-lifted, if necessary, to deal with an emergency in any particular area. For example, the floodings we had at Paarden Eiland, or in Green Point, have caused damage which, by using normal maintenance staff, is going to take weeks and weeks to repair. It should be possible in a case like that to take from other areas an emergency unit, drawn perhaps from three or four major cities, and to fly them in to crack it as a major emergency job. This is preferable to battling along with only the dedication to which the hon. the Minister referred. He referred to an article in Postal, and I agree with him; tremendous sacrifices were made. But if he were able to fly in an emergency gang, they would not have to do that sort of thing.

I want to refer to another matter and that is the question of the form of switching equipment which was debated last year. It is clear that the hon. the Minister is proceeding to use the same system he used previously, even in the new exchanges. Information which he gave me in answer to a question shows that there is still only one electronic exchange, which is now being expanded by 500 lines. Surely we could have expected the hon. the Minister to tell us whether this electronic exchange is proving its worth and whether this is in fact—as we believe it is—the switching system on which we shall have to work in the future. There must also be some breakdown in communications between this hon. Minister and the hon. the Minister of Transport because where he is sticking to the rotary system, the hon. the Minister of Transport this week, on 3 September, revealed that 91,5% of railway telephone switchboards have now been converted to the cross-bar system. The hon. the Minister of Transport made this announcement a few minutes before the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications delivered his Budget Speech. Unfortunately I do not have the time to deal with it, but he gave nine very good reasons why this system was being installed. He dealt with all the problems which the hon. the Minister and the rest of us have to face when we get a wrong number. He dealt with the staff situation and with the maintenance situation and said the South African Railways has converted entirely to cross-bar switching at a cost of R6,7 million. Surely, if the major transport organization of South Africa, a unit of Government, has found that this is the most efficient and the most effective system and the Post Office finds that it is not, there must be something wrong in the co-ordination and liaison between the two departments. One of the arguments for switching to the cross-bar system is that the two systems can be integrated. In other words, the cross-bar system can be integrated into the automatic system of the Post Office. I hope that the hon. the Minister will tell us why his department is not also switching over to a system which, according to the hon. the Minister of Transport, is a better system. Otherwise he must tell us that the Minister of Transport does not know what he is doing.

Finally I want to deal with the question of the telephone directory and I want to make another suggestion. We have had the spectacle of a 1973 telephone directory appearing on 10 December 1973. In other words it means that the telephone directory for 1973 was used for a whole 21 days by those who received it on the first day of issue. Then, for a whole year it was out of date. Now we are going to get another one in December 1974 which will be a 1974-’75 directory. I suggest that we should at least call it what it is, namely not a 1975 directory, and stop bluffing the public that they are getting something up to date when they are really getting a 1974 directory exactly 12 months behind time.

Finally. I am afraid that the hon. the Minister is going to be unpopular, with his new party lines, with those persons who spend much of their time listening in to conversations. I think he should design some sort of alternative entertainment for the eavesdroppers and “quizzies” of the party lines of today.

Mr. Speaker, having reached the final stage of this Appropriation Bill, viz. the Third Reading, and having reached the final confirmation of this capital programme of R184 million and a current account of R417 million, the following questions occur to us: The first is whether the appropriation which has been made, is large enough and sufficient for the year which lies ahead. The second question is what the effect of this Budget will be. The third is whether it will be spent properly. I want to begin with the last question, i.e. whether the money which will be appropriated by this House will be spent properly. I want to say at once that there is no doubt in my mind that the money which is being appropriated by this House will be spent properly because the hon. the Minister, the Postmaster-General, and his staff, have over the years proved that they know how to utilize these funds properly. We also know that this money could not be entrusted to better hands, because we know that the staff of the Post Office have already proved themselves in this respect. I also want to associate myself with those members who availed themselves of this opportunity of congratulating the Post Office staff and thanking them for the outstanding work which they did under those difficult circumstances when the country was suffering from floods. Therefore these estimates may quite safely be left in those hands.

What has the Opposition’s contribution to this Budget been? That is the question to which I should like to come. We have been listening to them for two days, and we heard few suggestions, but a great deal of criticism. They were unable to make a contribution because there was nothing to scavenge on—after all, we know them to be a lot of vultures who merely want to scavenge. Because there were no tariff increases ...

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

I withdraw that word. Once again they merely wanted to scavenge on anything they could find, but because there were no tariff increases, they were unfortunately unable to achieve their object.

They are bustards.

The hon. member for Durban Point, for example, was guilty of this. Yesterday he told the whole world here that the taxpayer would, in the ensuing year, have to pay R66 million more for the use of telephone services in South Africa. Does the hon. member agree with that?

Did I say that?

Yes, you did. I made a note of what you said. Surely that is a false report which is being bruited abroad. Surely he is presenting a false picture. Why does the hon. member not analyse the matter. It is true that the estimate shows that an additional income of R66 million is expected, but the hon. member did not do his homework.

Look on page 22.

Where does the R66 million come from? It does not come out of the pockets of the users of telephone services. Of that amount R5 million is interest and dividends earned, and a further R20 million is Savings Bank interest. In other words, R25 million of that R66 million does not come from the users of the telephone services.

Is that not also their money?

Of course not. That is interest earned. This is the type of report with which they want to make the voters of South Africa believe that an additional R66 million is being taken from them. They are the people who are wailing about the salaries. An amount of R41 million remains and this is obtained from the users of telecommunications services. The hon. member did not tell the world that R22 million of that amount will be spent on increased salaries. I think the hon. member ought to apologize to this House. It is almost as great a scandal as Watergate. To send such a report out into the world, is really going too far. It just goes to show what irresponsible criticism emanates from that side of the House.

We know that the hon. member for Wynberg has been designated as the new shadow Minister of Posts and Telecommunications. We do not know how long he will be here. He lost 24-0; therefore I think that he is only here temporarily. I do not think that he will ever have the privilege of becoming a Cabinet Minister. What became of the previous chairman of that group? Do you know why he is not in this House any more? It was because he acted in an irresponsible way. That hon. member found himself following in his footsteps yesterday. He said here that capital expenditure had not been fully utilized and that we were trying in this way to build up a surplus. That is what the hon. member said. He did not say that of the voted amount of R163 million, an amount of R159 million had been spent, that there was only an amount of R4 million which had not been spent, a mere 2.4%. He did not inform the House that of the previous year’s estimates of R147 million in respect of capital programme, an amount of R146 million had been spent. That the hon. member omitted to mention. This shows that he is following in his predecessor’s footsteps. The Opposition likes criticizing. They always say “too little, too late”. I know what they want. We should spend more capital. How do they want to spend the capital in this country? We must install services, install a network, and then the cables must remain underground until such time as the areas are occupied. Then they turn round and say: This National Party Government has spent millions of rand; the capital has been invested there, the network has been installed, but there is no income from it because it has not been connected. That is what these people are like. If one wants sound management, one must utilize the capital which one applies properly. We have listened to these debates for many years, and I must say, with all due respect, that I do not think in the ten years I have been sitting in this House I have ever heard a weaker attack or poorer criticism from the Opposition than we had this year. I have a very high regard for the hon. member for Durban Point. However, I must tell him that I think he should confine himself to defence. The sooner he phases out as acting chairman of this group, the better it will be for his party and this Committee. I want to give the hon. member for Wynberg some sound advice. If he wants to take over this post, then he should not merely criticize, he should also be positive. I explained to the hon. member what happened to the former member for Orange Grove. Do you know why he is no longer in this House, Sir? It is because he acted in an irresponsible way; it was because he gossiped and because he believed every piece of gossip he heard. That is why he is no longer here. I want to quote what the former member for Orange Grove said in his speech during the Post Office Budget debate in 1973. He said (Hansard, 21 March 1973, column 3053)—

Those were the words of Mr. Etienne Malan. Now I ask: Where is he? He is not here. It was not only the voters who threw him out. On 24 April we asked the voters for a mandate. Apart from the voters who kicked him out, his head is on the platter in the hands of the hon. member for Yeoville. That is where his head is. I want to give that hon. member the assurance that that spectre will haunt him for many years.

You are on the wrong line altogether.

Put five cents in the meter.

On 24 April 1974 we went to the voters and asked them for a mandate. What did they do? They said: We entrust the Department of Posts and Telecommunications to the National Party; you are the people who are competent to spend R601 million. That was the directive from the voters. They went on to say: You have been governing us well for 26 years, and we want you to keep on governing us for the next 26 years as well. That is the mandate which we received.

I have referred to the former member for Orange Grove. We also know what happened to the hon. member for Florida. He gossiped himself right out of this House. He is the person who said: “When I use the telephone, I find that my lines are crossed.” He told the Minister: “Sir, this is the finest propaganda which I am making against the National Party, for then we can hold a conversation and I can tell the people how unsatisfactory the telecommunications service is.” Sir, where is the hon. member for Florida? He referred to our telecommunications system here as a coffin system. Sir, today he himself is a political corpse.

The hon. member for Durban Point tried to illustrate how poor our telecommunications service is. Sir, I recently got off the plane at Jan Smuts Airport, walked to the telephone, got through to Cape Town and was speaking to my wife within seconds; I said to her: “Hullo, darling, I am here; I have arrived safely.” I then told her: “Please go and see whether I switched my car lights off when I parked at the airport,” for I had been a little late. Sir, at a cost of 20 cents I informed my wife that I still loved her; secondly, I reassured her that I had had a safe flight; and thirdly she went to make sure that my car lights had been switched off; it could have cost me R24 or R30 for a new battery. All this I got for 20 cents. The hon. member must not come here and tell us here that we do not have an effective service. [Interjections.] Sir, I have some sound advice to give the hon. member for Wynberg; he must try to act in a positive way.

Sir, the second question I want to spend some time discussing is whether sufficient provision has been made in these Estimates. Sir, surely it is no use appropriating an amount which one is not equipped to spend, and I do think that provision is being made in these Estimates for sufficient funds. If we look around us, surely we know that we have efficient services in this country. What did things look like under the United Party régime? In 1948 there were only 318 500 telephones; in March of this year we had 1 800 000. Sir, surely hon. members on that side cannot speak of a “record”. I do not have much time at my disposal.

Hear, hear!

Hon. members on that side want me to resume my seat because they cannot bear to get a hiding. Sir, in 1948 the United Party was unable to administer the country. When the National Party came into power, they said the banks would close. They were unable to place orders for telephones; they wanted to flee, but the National Party said: “Give us the money; we shall develop the Post Office in South Africa.” We did not flinch away. Sir, just see how our revenue and expenditure account has grown over the past few years. I also want to say here that the Post Office is not only endeavouring to provide quantity; the great task of the Post Office is to provide quality. Sir, when they wanted to flee from South Africa in the days of Sharpeville, the National Party, this Government, pumped money into the economy of South Africa. We stimulated the economy and today we have a Phalaborwa; and see what is happening at Witbank, Middelburg, the Vaal Triangle, Richards Bay and Saldanha Bay. Sir, this department is providing all the necessary and basic services. Could one ever entrust a task of any importance to such a foolish party as that? If they had remained in power, one would have had fewer telephones in this country. Sir, the voters of South Africa have confidence in the National Party. They see that their future is safe in the hands of the National Party. They know, too, that as long as this National Party is governing, the telecommunications services in this country will be in good hands.

It gives me great pleasure to thank the hon. member for Vanderbijlpark for his congratulations. I do not know whether I can follow all the sound advice he gave me, but talking about advice, I think I can give him some advice too. When I entered politics initially and got up to make a speech in a chamber for the first time, I realized that when I have some comment to make, I should always see to it that the people in respect of whom I was going to comment, should be present in the Chamber. I think the hon. member will do well to keep this advice in mind, because the people in respect of whom he expressed some criticism this afternoon are no longer with us in this Chamber.

But surely Koos Yster has never been here.

I think he ought to have given it some further consideration before making his speech this afternoon. In any case, I do not intend dealing with the hon. member any further. There are a few other matters I should like to deal with in the very short time at my disposal.

In the first place, I want to refer to the Post Office Savings Bank, and I want to ask the hon. the Minister to give us some more information in connection with the accounting procedure which is going to be followed in that Post office Savings Bank. According to the replies he furnished to us this afternoon while replying during the Committee Stage of this debate, it seems to me that considerable capital amounts will no longer be available during the next couple of years. The first considerable capital amount that is going to be available, will only become available in two or three years’ time, and in the meantime one would like to make use of the funds of the Post Office Savings Bank. For that reason it is important to know on what basis the accounting will be done. Would it be on a cash basis or is the Post Office Savings Bank going to loan the department some money? This is an interesting point and I hope the hon. the Minister will furnish us with that information.

The other point I want to deal with briefly is the question of the staff board. When replying to the Second Reading debate the hon. the Minister merely referred to this matter in passing. We should very much like to know what the composition of this board is going to be. If I understood the Minister correctly it seems to me that this is practically a departmental board only. In other words, this is not a special board, but consists of officials of the department who meet in the form of a board, and that it takes the place of the present Post Office Board. The hon. the Minister also said that this arrangement meets with the approval of the staff. I do not know whether we on this side of the House can be satisfied unless we are given further particulars about this board. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will be able to furnish us with these particulars.

We also have not been furnished with a reply in connection with the vacation savings bonusses and subsistence expenses. The hon. the Minister will recall that I mentioned the resolution of the Post and Telegraph Association and drew attention to the fact that they had asked for this vacation savings bonus to be increased to a maximum amount of R500 for married officials and R250 for unmarried officials and, furthermore, for the existing tariffs in respect of travelling and subsistence expenses to be revised to be in line with the present accommodation and travelling expenses. At that time I referred to the statements and drew attention to the fact that when one compares these figures with those of the previous year, one will find that no adjustment has been made. The hon. the Minister has not yet told us whether he is, in fact, going to make any adjustments. I should also like to know whether he is going to consider any of the other resolutions.

†Sir, in the very limited time left to me I would just like to say that the hon. member for Vanderbijlpark reminded me of something when he spoke about the laying of a cable which was not going to be used. He said that the department would never think of laying a cable which would not be used for a few years. It is suggested to me and, in fact, that is what I believe the hon. the Minister has in mind in connection with television. I believe the hon. the Minister is going to lay cables from the various television stations to link them to micro-wave stations and that those cables, having been put underground, will lie under the ground for some years until 1 January 1976 before they will be put into operation. That leads me to the following: I understand that there are members of the trade who say that television does not need to wait until 1 January 1976. They say that television can, in fact, be put into operation immediately because at this present moment there is already equipment installed on the Witwatersrand that will be capable of providing a television programme for the whole of the Witwatersrand and Pretoria. The introduction of television is only being delayed because of the fact that these cables, to which the hon. the Minister referred yesterday, will have to be laid.

I should like the hon. the Minister to take us into his confidence. I believe he should take the whole of the country into his confidence in regard to television. At the present moment there are many stories one hears about television, of things not going according to plan. I think the hon. the Minister owes it, not only to this House but to the whole country, to tell the country exactly what is going on. He should give the country a progress report on television. I think that everybody will be extremely grateful if the hon. the Minister is able to give this progress report to us this afternoon when he replies to the Third Reading debate.

You are addressing the wrong Minister.

I am told that I am addressing the wrong Minister.

You still have a lot to learn.

In connection with the introduction of television we have again the old question of dual control, something on which the Nationalist Party is very keen. They have dual control in many things and that is why so many things go wrong. At this stage I wonder how much control we have. Do we have the control of the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, do we have the control of the Minister of National Education and do we have the control of the Broederbond as well? Who is the third member of the triumvirate? I think the time has now arrived that we should be put into the picture. If the hon. the Minister cannot tell us whether television can be put into operation now, then I believe that he should be able to tell us who can tell us. I should also like to know why the hon. the Minister cannot tell us, because I believe there should be the necessary liaison between those two Government departments. If there is no liaison, then I think every hon. member of this House is entitled to know why there is no liaison. I believe that the hon. the Minister should now be able to tell us exactly what progress has been made in regard to television and what steps have been taken by his colleague in charge of National Education.

Mr. Speaker, at the start of his speech the hon. member for Wynberg raised a few matters of general interest to which the hon. the Minister will probably reply. Towards the end of his speech, however, he raised a matter concerning television. I hope that his older colleagues in the House will inform the hon. member that such aspects as the date of installation and the control of television do not fall under this hon. Minister. They belong with the hon. the Minister of National Education. [Interjections.] I do not know whether that hon. member who is an old member and is interrupting me now does not know this either.

When the hon. member for Durban Point, the temporary chief spokesman on Post Office affairs ...

The temporary chief spokesman?

Yes, the temporary chief spokesman, because we were informed by the hon. member for Vanderbijl Park who spoke before me that someone was to succeed the hon. member for Durban Point. When the hon. member for Durban Point made his second reading speech, he uttered lamentation upon lamentation concerning the poor telephone service. I was just waiting for him to propose at some stage that the telephone service should be taken over by private enterprise. Suddenly he did so. Isaac of old heard the voice of Jacob, but felt the hands of Esau. In the same way I heard the hon. member for Durban Point, but it was really the voice of his predecessor, the former hon. member for Orange Grove. I want to read to the hon. member what the hon. member for Orange Grove said on 13 February 1974 in Hansard, volume 47, column 770 in connection with this matter. I quote as follows—

Later on he concluded this argument with the words—

What is wrong with that?

Today and yesterday we have again heard the voice of the hon. member’s predecessor here, but it is through the mouth of the hon. member for Durban Point. He states—

Then why do you moan?

I am coming to the point now. Since the hon. member for Durban Point is developing this theme, we want to ask him whether this is also the policy of his party which he is stating in this regard. If that is the case, I want to say that it is extremely ridiculous and unrealistic. Private enterprise will only be willing to take over such services, or sections of services, if they are profitable to them. That is what the hon. member is hitting at. He wants private initiative to take over those services which are profitable. In other words, those services which are not profitable, would have to be retained by the Post Office. Simply let private initiative skim off the cream. It would lead to divided control over telephone services which would bring about a very unhealthy and impractical situation. The Minister did say that private organizations were employed to install telephones, but not to undertake maintenance work and exercize control. There is no question of that. I want to tell the hon. member and the United Party with great conviction that no private undertaking would be prepared to make tremendous investments and then provide a service at a loss. I am now going to quote to the hon. member and to other hon. members who are listening, an excerpt from Volkshandel of April 1974. It is a speech made by Mr. C. G. Gous, Deputy Postmaster-General, Telecommunications Services, at a congress of the Public Relations Institute of South Africa. He said the following (transaltion)—

Sir, Mr. Gous motivated this speech by pointing out—I quote further—that no business man would be prepared to pay about R30 million for the party line system, for example. The hon. member also asked here, a short time ago, that the party line system be improved so that other people could not listen in. I quote further (translation)—

Now the hon. member and his party, because he states that this is also the policy of his party, must go ahead and hand over to private enterprise those regions in which a profit is made. How ridiculous they can be! Mr. Gous ascribes the losses to the higher labour costs in the rural areas where switchboards are operated manually and the telephone density and call costs are low. Now I want to tell you that the hon. the Minister referred to the colossal expenses involved in telephone services in general, as well as post office services. It is also stated here: “Post Office administrations throughout the world are operating at a loss. A few years ago, the postal service of the United States of America ...” Take note of this—“... showed a loss which was greater than South Africa’s national budget.” Sir, I just want to say that if we compare the telecommunications service of South Africa with that of other countries—and speakers on our side have proved this—then we must all admit that South Africa’s services compare very favourably with them.

I also want to refer to a matter broached by the hon. the Minister in his Second Reading speech concerning the Chair in telecommunications at the University of Pretoria. It was with great interest and satisfaction that one heard, quite a time ago already, about the establishment of this Chair. Now we have been informed of this again by the Minister. As a member of the University Council of the University of Pretoria, I feel happy, and the University feels honoured, that that Chair should have been entrusted to it. If South Africa wants to maintain its leading role in the sphere of telecommunications, satellite communications and electronic exchanges, and not lag or fall behind according to world standards, then this important step is certainly a timely one. There will perhaps be those who will ask why we have given preference to the University of Pretoria in this regard. The answer, of course, is obvious. Pretoria University is the obvious university for this purpose because the telecommunications head office of the Post Office is in Pretoria. Now a full-time professor is being appointed. He will also be able to receive useful assistance from the professional engineers of the Post Office in the form of series of lectures in specialized subjects. And apart from that, post-graduate students will also have easy access to the Post Office’s laboratory there in Pretoria, and to other specialized equipment set up there, too. The establishment of this Chair should inspire interest in telecommunications in both under-graduate and post-graduate students. It may be felt that the amount which is being spent, namely R200 000 over a period of ten years, is too high, but if we consider, as the hon. member mentioned a moment ago, that the costs involved in training a technician are enormously high, what this amounts to is that the amount which will be spent every year would only cover the present costs involved in training two technicians. Through making bursaries available, provision will doubtless be made for the students who want to study in this field, but I want to conclude by appealing to private initiative to make bursaries available too. The Post Office does this and it ties the students down for a few years after they have completed their studies. I want to ask that the private sector, in other words trade and industry, should also make bursaries available and when I say this I am addressing myself chiefly to the manufacturers of electronic components. Even though these organizations were to tie down their students as the Post Office does, they would still get students who would like to study in that field and who would accept the offer. Those organizations, by making bursaries available to students who want to study in that field, will be doing a service not only to themselves, but also to the country as such.

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of incurring the rather raucous wrath of the hon. member for Vanderbijlpark, I should just like to make a very brief contribution to this debate at this very late stage. I have no desire to flog a pretty dead horse ... [Interjections.] ... but in view of the appalling complacency of the hon. members on the other side of the House about the state of our telephone services, I thought it might be helpful for this House if I quoted one or two very brief facts from a recent academic study of the telephone system in this country, a study which was undertaken by an East London business executive. I think it shows the economic implications of the telephone system as it exists today. In this study it was found that overseas investors regarded it at a very clear negative factor for investment that South Africa’s telephone system was, as they say, quite inadequate. For example, a market research survey for a large British group of companies which recommended investment in South Africa, described the telephone service as “inadequate” and felt that heavy investment in telecommunications was necessary in order to keep pace with the economy. That is one factor the implications of which we should be aware of. This study went on to point out that what it called “telephone penetration” in the United States amounted to 89,3% of the population. The position in South Africa—I hope that some of the hon. members who quoted reams of figures about conditions overseas will listen—is that the percentage for Whites is 70% and for non-Whites almost 0%. The study found too that a big market research company had shelved the use of a promising telephone research service because of the difficulty of getting service during peak hours. According to them the attitude of the Post Office “appears to be that people should use the phone less at peak hours, from which one might assume that its development plans adhere to the optimum, not maximum, telephone traffic”. This is a sobering thought indeed. I should like to emphasize that I am sure that this complacency which I spoke about, is certainly not shared by the Post Office Department. I think we should bear it in mind and just be aware ourselves of the fact that our system needs, as has been stressed, far greater capital expenditure coupled with greatly increased training schemes for all races, particularly non-Whites.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the hon. members on my side for the positive contributions which they made to this debate, contributions which testified to a very intense interest in the Post Office and all related matters. I also want to express my gratitude to all the hon. members of the House who expressed appreciation for what the staff of the Post Office are doing. These people are performing a great task, for which they certainly deserve our appreciation. For that reason I want to convey my thanks to all members of both sides who mentioned this.

Once again I want to respond to what hon. members said, in the sequence in which they spoke, and I shall reply to all matters which appeared to me to be important. In regard to my reply in the Committee Stage on the reading matter of the political parties, the hon. member for Durban Point advocated that we should in future, in view of the postal fees, allow the political parties to be heard over the radio and appear on television. When television comes people from all parties will naturally appear on television from time to time. That is what television is for. In this respect he will certainly be able to make his contribution. Whether this should be done in the form of a programme before an election, is something which will have to be decided. I take it that the political parties will by that time have made the necessary representations to the Government, so that the SABC may consider them.

It is the Government party which is afraid.

The Government has a good case, and fortunately it also has people who will make a good showing on television. The Government therefore has nothing from which it need shrink.

Then why is the Nationalist Party afraid?

It is not afraid of anything of this nature. It has a case to put, and it has, in fact, put it so success fully already that there is only a handful of members sitting on the opposite side of the House today. This is the best proof of the strength of the National Party’s case. If we were to appear on television as well, we would eliminate them completely and we might even have a one-party State still.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. the Minister a question? May I deduce from his words that he is giving the undertaking that the Opposition will in fact be granted radio and television time?

If the temporary acting main speaker on the Post Office had listened to what I have just said, i.e. that he could make representations to that effect, he would really not have asked that question.

The hon. member for Durban Point referred again to the non-Whites who are not on the permanent staff. It is true that there are non-Whites who are not on the permanent staff. We have been discussing the figures in regard to that matter here for the past two days. Many of them are temporary workers who are appointed from day to day. They come and go. This is the case in every province. What is important is that we have, since 1 October last year, begun to place all non-Whites performing permanent work in the Post Office on a permanent scale. Previously many of them had not been on a salary scale but were paid a fixed amount. In many cases this amount was determined by the local wage pattern. As from last October, however, a start was made to place all non-Whites working permanently for the Post Office on a permanent scale. In addition to that, of course, they receive all the benefits of a pension, etc.

The hon. member also discussed the dialling machinery which we also discussed here last year and the previous year, viz. the cross-bar system. Firstly, as far as the comparison with the Railways is concerned, the position is that the Railways system, in contrast to the posts and telecommunications system is a very small communications system. Perhaps that system suits their purpose very well, but we must have an electronic system which answers to certain requirements. One of the many important requirements is that it should be able to link up with our existing system. Surely we cannot introduce such electronic dialling equipment throughout South Africa over-night. This is something which will have to be installed gradually. I have already informed the House that we are going to begin in Tzaneen with the first automation of the new exchange system. If, in a few years’ time, we reach a stage where we will be able to fit in a new electronic dialling system, we will up to that juncture already have installed some of the latest dialling systems. We cannot simply wipe out everything overnight and introduce a brand-new system which cannot link up with existing systems. We use a certain word for this, viz. we say it should be able to “marry” with the existing system. It should be able to link up with it so that one can gradually introduce the new electronic system which is still able to fit in with the existing one. This is why we have now asked these four major suppliers of Post Office dialling equipment to put their heads together to design a semi-electronic dialling equipment for us, which they will be able to submit to us, and which we will be able to use to effect this step-by-step conversion. This is work which is being done at present. I think we ought, within the period of a year, to be able to obtain such a report from these suppliers, after which my department will then be in a position to make a considered recommendation to me which will then of course be submitted to the Cabinet.

The hon. member also mentioned the 9% net increase in our capital.

For telecommunications.

Yes. We have spent a tremendous amount of money on telecommunications development during this past year. If it had not been for the inflation which we have been experiencing for the last year or two or three, we would at this juncture have spent far less money on capital development in this country on telecommunications. During the past ten years we have already spent an enormous amount of money on capital works for telecommunications in South Africa. After all, no country is able to develop beyond its means. Nor can one pump in more money that one is able to process and utilize with the people one has. That is why this 9% is to our minds an entirely realistic figure in view of what has already been achieved.

†I now wish to refer to a point which was raised by the hon. member for Constantia and also the hon. member for Wynberg. This was in connection with the Savings Bank. The hon. member for Constantia wanted to know whether we regarded the money in the Savings Bank as self-generated funds or as loan funds. That money will be regarded as loan funds. It is not ours; we did not earn it; we are only keeping it for the public. In terms of our 50-50 financing formula, that money is regarded as loan funds.

*Arising out of that I want to say this to the hon. member for Wynberg, who also wanted to know what the basic character of this money was and what our bookkeeping position in that regard was: All the money invested in the Post Office Savings Bank must be paid into the Post Office Fund. We borrow it from that fund. It is not our money; we borrow it from that Post Office Fund. We apply this money as capital. That point was made very clear to the House, viz. that that money would be borrowed for the capital development of the Post Office when we introduced the relevant piece of legislation here. Separate books will be kept for it. It is obvious that we will report on this in our annual report. We will of course reply to all the questions which hon. members opposite may put in this regard. There will be no secrecy on this score. Separate books will be kept for it, and we will in that way be held to account for it.

The hon. member also raised the question of the vacation savings bonus. The question of the reconsideration of the vacation savings bonus was in fact held back pending the investigation ordered by the Government into the question of other benefits for our public servants and the Post Office staff and all who fall under the aegis of the State. We felt that merely increasing the holiday savings bonus every time salary adjustments were made, was perhaps not the most ideal or the most satisfactory answer, and that the officials could perhaps be assisted in some other way. Consideration was given to our perhaps assisting the officials to an even greater and better extent than we are doing at the moment as far as housing is concerned. It was felt that there could perhaps be other privileges which they want and which they are not enjoying at the moment and which could be worth far more to them than an occasional increase in the vacation savings bonus. Consequently an inter-departmental committee was appointed, a committee on which representatives of the Post Office are also serving together with the representatives of all the departments in question. Dr Riekert is in charge of that committee and it will soon make recommendations as to what we should do in this regard. If they do not recommend anything else in the place of the vacation savings bonus, then the Government will again of course be in the position that it will have to consider increasing the vacation savings bonus. That is the stage we have reached at the moment.

The next point which the hon. member raised was the question of travelling and accommodation allowances. I may just mention that the staff have, since the Posts and Telegraphs congress, at which the resolutions to which the hon. member referred were adopted, in fact received adjustments to their accommodation allowances, and as far as we know they are satisfied with these. I have not received any report to the effect that they are not. We are, as I said yesterday, in constant contact with the staff associations. Cordial relations really exist between the entire management of the Post Office—myself and the Post Office on the one hand—and the Post Office Staff Associations on the other, and I can assure the hon. member that if they feel unhappy about anything of this nature, we would hear about it very soon and obviously, then, take cognizance of it.

Sir, I think that I have with this, replied to the points raised by hon. members, and I thank them once again for their interest in my department.

May I put a question to the hon. the Minister? I raised the question of television here and the date on which the service is going to be put into operation. Could the hon. the Minister enlighten us on this score?

The question of television itself, of course, falls under the Minister of National Education.

The broadcasting aspect.

No, we are the people who have to supply the audio-video channels, as I said in my introductory speech. I am prepared to discuss the aspect which we deal with, but a decision has already been taken regarding the question of the date of introduction. I can, in all earnestness, inform the hon. member that there is going to be no departure from the date which was decided on, viz. 1 January 1976. In fact, what I want to say in this connection has a bearing on the point which the hon. member raised, which is that television should have been introduced earlier. The reason for our deciding on the date 1 January 1976, was that we had to take the technical staff situation of the Post Office into consideration. Because we were afraid that Post Office technicians could perhaps, directly and indirectly, be drawn away by this entire television set-up, whether by the manufacturers, or by anyone else for that matter, it was felt that at least a few years should elapse in which these highly skilled people, who would have to manage the entire television undertaking, could be trained.

It is felt that 800 highly skilled people will be required for the introduction of television, and because these 800 highly skilled people which one requires, over and above those whom one normally has, are not available, it was felt at the time when we originally took the decision that we needed a period of three years until the end of 1975 so that as many technicians as possible could be trained to be available when television was introduced in 1976. This would consequently make the demand on the Defence Force and on us far less as far as technicians are concerned. Those were the considerations, seen from our point of view. That is why I am now mentioning it to you, and that consideration has, in the meantime, not become any the less valid. On the contrary. It remains a very serious matter and on that basis no argument can be advanced to the effect that the Government ought to reconsider such a decision.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Chairman, when business was interrupted last night, I had dealt with the appeal board. I concluded by saying that we should remember that this appeal board would be composed of what I called earlier a party hack who would be appointed as chairman, together with two assessors of his choice. They would have the right to frame the rules of that appeal board. Sir, I should like to take this question a little further. The rules of that appeal board will be framed by the chairman and apparently the two assessors, and those rules will be the rules which will be applied by the appeal board. Now those rules, I take it, will be as flexible as the chairman wishes them to be and they will certainly neither be rules of the Supreme Court nor rules of the magistrate’s court. I should imagine that these rules could be bent in any direction if the chairman so wished. So we get to this peculiar position that if, after the appeal board has heard an appeal according to a procedure prescribed by the chairman of that board, according to rules made by the chairman, the decision is taken on review, the court has to review that decision bearing in mind the rules which the chairman of the appeal board framed for his own convenience. Sir, this is such a concept of law that I shudder to think what will happen to the administration of justice if we continue to pass laws of this nature. Just imagine, Mr. Chairman, a court of review trying to decide whether the procedure followed by this appeal board was in order, was legal, was not irregular, and having to decide it according to the rules framed by the chairman of that same appeal board. It is quite unthinkable that legislation of this kind could be put on our Statute Book.

I should like to refer finally to the case of Bangtoo Brothers and Others v. National Transport Commission and Others (1973, S.A.L.R., Vol. 4, page 667), which was heard by the Natal Provincial Division. In this case Mr. Justice Henning gave judgment, and this judgment is regarded by all in the legal profession as the classic judgment on review. It is therefore important that we should understand what Mr. Justice Henning felt the responsibilities of a court of review to be. I mentioned last night generally the grounds for review.

Do not repeat them.

Of course I shall repeat them. You see, the hon. member for Bellville ...

No, I made that interjection.

Oh, it is the hon. member for Parow, his next-door neighbour. Both those hon. gentlemen, the hon. member for Bellville and the hon. member for Parow, are candidates for this appeal board. The hon. member for Bellville is the typical party hack I referred to, and so is the hon. member for Parow who will be an assessor. Between them can you imagine the mess they will make of the whole procedure of this appeal board? It is just too terrible to think about it. [Interjections.] Those members do not want me to repeat anything I said yesterday. I do not want to repeat anything but I want to shorten my speech by a few seconds by just giving a summary of what Mr. Justice Henning said in his judgment. [Interjections.] If that does not please hon. members, I shall rather read the whole of the judgment to them. It will take a little longer, of course.

The hon. member has nothing to say; why does he not rather sit down?

Mr. Justice Henning came to the conclusion that there were various grounds on which one could take decisions on review. One of the grounds with which he deals very fully is the principles of natural justice. He said (at page 684)—

I do not want to go into the whole of this judgment, but I have merely quoted the above because I believe that this is a very telling part of the judgment which proves that what hon. members on the other side want us to do is to become party to a complete travesty of justice as we know it in this country.

Why?

I say if there is any hon. member on the other side, including the hon. member for Bellville, who still asks “why”, then he should go to have his head read. He had no business to serve on the commission of inquiry and he has no business to sit in this House and to take part in this debate.

Mr. Chairman, we are not in favour of this clause, not because we do not wish to allow for a review at all, but rather because we believe that the form of review detailed herein is of an emasculated nature and thus the value of this review is gravely diminished. The grounds for review are clearly set out in section 24 of the Supreme Court Act and they are briefly, the absence of jurisdiction, interest in a cause, bias, malice, corruption—that is the mala fides which is mentioned in the clause—and the gross irregularity in proceedings. If we note that gross irregularity in proceedings only is a ground for review, it will give the lie to the statement of the hon. the Deputy Minister who has said that if sufficient evidence is not heard or if some evidence is perhaps disallowed, this will be a ground for review. This need not necessarily be so. An absolute case of gross irregularity would have to be shown and finally, the admission of incorrect or incompetent evidence. In themselves these grounds are very restricted and only in exceptional cases may an applicant succeed. In some cases the courts only have the power on making a finding, particularly in regard to an irregularity, to refer the matter back to the inferior court. In other cases the powers of the reviewing court are far greater. For instance, if one looks at the provisions of automatic review in the Magistrates’ Courts Act, there are three aspects that are considered by the court handling the review. The first is the aspect of the actual proceedings, i.e. whether they have been fair and correct in terms of the procedure laid down. The second aspect which is decided upon review is the decision made by the court as to whether the case before it is a proper one and as to the findings in regard to one party or another.

Order! I hope the hon. member is not going to discuss the whole principle of the Bill.

I am going to relate it to this clause, Sir. Finally, this court decides upon the sentence. In terms of section 98 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act, the court can set aside proceedings, it can confirm or quash a conviction and it can reduce, alter or amend a sentence. Another very wide provision of review which we complain is not in this provision, is that it can generally give judgment, impose such sentence or make such order as the lower court should have made. It will be seen, therefore, that while the grounds for review are narrow the powers on review by a court are usually far wider. But this is not the case in clause 39 of this Bill. The court cannot in terms of this very timid clause even alter or change a patently wrong decision. It can merely refer it back. It is almost as if this Government is afraid to allow our universally respected judiciary to approach within ten miles of any matter relating to the proposed blinkering of the public, which is the express intention of this Bill. This is very limiting and certainly no comfort to those who would wish to seek redress knowing that after all the expense had been incurred and all the trouble had been taken of initiating and prosecuting review proceedings, even upon succeeding, the whole matter was only going to be referred back in the end result to the same board which allowed the original irregularity to pass. This is a most unhappy state of affairs. What is worse, is what is provided in clause 39 (3). Having stated in the proviso to subsection (2) the following:

Having stated that and having granted to the court in this singular circumstance the right to make a substantive decision, the hon. the Deputy Minister then takes fright, no doubt realizing that for once the morals of South Africa are being left to our courts, which are outside the scope and control of his department. In order to negate this alarming possibility he includes subsection (3) which states:

If I read this subsection correctly, it means that the decision of the court is now deemed to be a decision of the committee. As we all know decisions of a committee are appealable. The whole merry-go-round of make-believe justice is then triggered off once again. It seems to me that either this Government is completely contemptuous ...

May I ask the hon. member a question?

I would like to finish my speech. It seems to me that either this Government is completely contemptuous of the ability of our courts to deal with such matters or this is gobbledy-gook drafting of the first order, resulting in a whirlwind of red tape, legal proceedings and reports. This is not a clause we can go along with.

Mr. Chairman, having listened to the inflammatory and fiery speech made by the hon. member for Wynberg, one really feels in the mood for taking part in this debate.

Order! The hon. member must withdraw the words “inflammatory speech”.

I withdraw them, Mr. Chairman. It is most surprising that the Opposition speakers from both Opposition groups are still harping on the same string. First we heard that this appeal body under clause 36 had to be a judge with two assessors. Then we came to clause 38, and there their standpoint was that there was to be no appeal to the appeal board but to a court of law. And now that we are dealing with clause 39, which contains a guide, a directive for our courts when it comes to reviewing provisions of this nature and decisions of the appeal board, objections are raised to it once again. One must have regard to one thing—it is, after all, this very clause 38, which has already been agreed to, which has been the real point at issue. Clause 39 is merely a guide. One must have regard to the fact that we have here hon. members of the Opposition party who are lawyers, too, who know that in South Africa there are also two views concerning these matters which are brought before our courts. We have a so-called southern and a northern view. We need only look at the judgments handed down in Wellington Municipality v. Minister of Labour, Frankfort Municipality v. Minister of Labour, and Borough Council of Newcastle v. Minister of Labour. In the latter instance it was, incidentally, also Mr. Justice Henning. It was explicitly decided that there were doubts when these matters were brought before the Supreme Court, whether they are brought before a court as a court of the first instance or whether they are brought before the court as appeals. And here, specifically in clauses 38 and 39, we now find that security of justice is being created as far as these matters are concerned. But, Mr. Chairman, I think it is essential that one should also take a look at the nature of this appeal body, of the appeal board in this case. One should see whether there are analogous cases for this. Is it right that there will only be review and that there will be no appeal, except in cases of mala fides or where the appeal board does not give proper attention to the matter brought before it? There is one thing we must remember, Mr. Chairman, and that is that this hon. House is actually the major law-making organ in South Africa, and we are extremely proud of our relatively young system of law in South Africa. But this is a system of law characterized by vitality and flexibility. We must be very, very careful not to land ourselves in a pool of stagnation or in hidebound rigidity. And the very purpose of this appeal board which has already been created, by clause 36, is to develop, to refine our administrative law in this country. The hon. member for Vereeniging pointed out during the Second Reading stage of this debate already that we had many analogous cases in South Africa, cases relating to this type of body which is being created and relating to its functions and composition. As the best example of our administrative law on the administrative and executive level, he mentioned the industrial tribunal under the Industrial Conciliation Act. And hon. members opposite even tried to prove from the Industrial Conciliation Act itself that there was in effect no question of analogous bodies here. After all, it is a fact that in referring to two boards of control which have the same function but do not act in the same sphere, I would not appoint a wheat expert to the Milk Board. Surely I would not appoint a Botterbul or rather a butter expert to the Wheat Board. I would, after all, appoint a person who has knowledge of that specific field of study. In any case, it would be a person who has knowledge of the matters we are concerned with. For the same reason the right people with the necessary knowledge will be appointed to the industrial tribunal. The industrial tribunal is, likewise, a quasi-judicial institution which is an administrative tribunal. For that reason it is in fact an extremely good example when we compare the industrial tribunal with this appeal board.

Therefore, in comparing briefly the provisions of this clause with the provisions in respect of the analogous body which we already have in our administrative law in South Africa, we find what I am going to show hon. members now. Let me start with the background in order to come to this clause. We find that the chairman of the industrial tribunal was appointed by the Minister for a period of five years, while the chairman of the appeal board will also be appointed for a period of five years by the State President. What do they deal with? The industrial tribunal deals with matters and disputes referred to it by industrial councils, by conciliation boards and by the Minister. What does the appeal board deal with? It deals with matters referred to it by committees, the directorate and the Minister. Hon. members have been singing the praises of the Industrial Conciliation Act and the machinery established by it. The meetings and the sittings of the industrial tribunal, too, are not open to the public as a matter of course. A special decision has to be taken, just as is being provided in this legislation. The Industrial Conciliation Act provides that the awards of the industrial tribunal shall be final and binding. We find the same here. In terms of the Industrial Conciliation Act no right of appeal but in fact a right of review is granted, and precisely the same applies in this legislation.

One should ask oneself why the Opposition is so opposed not only to the existing legislation being repealed, but also to the right of appeal to the courts being taken away. From the tenor of the reasoning of the Opposition it is very clear to us that they do not want a quasi-judicial body to be created. If it is created, it has to be a legal body or an extra division of the Supreme Court. Eighteen years ago we also witnessed this phenomenon when hon. members on the Opposition side who are still sitting here were also opposed to such a measure. I see the hon. member for Griqualand East looking at me. At the time he was still the member for the Transkei, but 18 years ago he waxed lyrical about the fact that the industrial tribunal had to be a court of law. In fact, the hon. member for Houghton, who at the time was still sitting here in another capacity, pleaded at that stage for a special division of the Supreme Court to be created for that purpose. However, that was not all. The hon. member for Griqualand East asked at the time that there be two bodies who were to have judges of the Supreme Court as chairmen. The one body had to serve the southern part of the country and the other body the northern part. Now the hon. member for Houghton accuses the hon. the Deputy Minister and says that he has to break away from his archaic way of thinking his mediaeval views. However, after 18 years hon. members are still advocating the same type of body. Who has remained behind now? Who is struggling with the archaism of 18 years ago now, and who is so proud of the institutions in terms of the Industrial Conciliation Act?

In 1956 the Government did not yield to the pleas that the industrial tribunal should be a court of law, but decided that it was to be an administrative tribunal. The industrial tribunal has proved itself owing to its objectivity, the fact that it has in all cases given judgment in a knowledgeable manner and the fact that all its awards bore clear testimony to impartiality. Now we ask that this appeal board be afforded the same opportunity so that it may prove itself in its field. The people appointed to it should also be afforded the opportunity of being able to acquire the same knowledge. I am convinced that if, in 18 years’ time, we should come forward with an acceptable tribunal in another sphere, we would probably have the same arguments again in respect of this special division of the Supreme Court.

Actually, a very loud discordant note was heard in this debate yesterday. In the first instance, the hon. member for Green Point said that the hon. member for Vereeniging was the devil’s advocate in this House, but in my opinion the hon. member for Green Point himself looks a great deal like a hell’s angel. The only thing is that I do not know what he would look like on a motor cycle. However, that is not all. The hon. member for Orange Grove made a very low attack on this legislation and on the hon. the Deputy Minister. He said, to be specific, that this legislation was being created specially for a certain section of the population, namely the section still bound to the old Voortrekkers who trekked into the interior by ox-wagon. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment—

Mr. Chairman, I know you will not be as tolerant with me as you have been with the hon. member for Pretoria East who has been talking about clauses which we have already disposed of. At this stage I want to look at this clause in the light of the fact that the Committee has already agreed under clause 35 that appeals will be to an appeal board and under clause 38 that there can be no appeal to the Supreme Court. We are now looking at the question of review which is dealt with in clause 39. I think the hon. member for Pretoria East used a fatal argument in suggesting that the operations of the Dairy Board should be taken as an example that we can look at. He also gave his reasons why we should now have this type of board controlling publications. I want to say that one thing the hon. member said was correct. We are looking at what will happen after a decision has been taken by the appeal board in terms of this clause. The hon. member has referred to this board as a quasi-judicial body, but I would say it is more quasi than judicial. At any rate, that body now exists. Hon. members who have spoken before me, i.e. the hon. members for Wynberg and Sandton, made it clear that this provision of so-called review by the Supreme Court is review in a most emasculated form. I do not want to repeat the arguments of those hon. members; I just want to say that the appeal board, which is now constituted, makes its own rules. When it comes to the possibility of review, the review is limited by those rules since that body operates within its own rules. Secondly, the discretion of the Supreme Court, acting as a court of review, is now completely removed in respect of what orders it can and cannot grant on review. Thirdly, the decision of the Supreme Court goes back into the pipeline and comes back as a committee decision, again subject to review or appeal to the appeal board at the instance of the directorate. Under those circumstances we want to make it quite clear that we on this side of the House, now having before us an appeal board with no right of appeal, favour a review in the ordinary sense which at least offers some relief. That is why I have moved that subsections (2) and (3) be omitted, since clause 39 will then merely consist of a statement that the decisions of the appeal board will be subject to review before three judges of the Supreme Court.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg South has the habit of waiting for me every time instead of having his say before the time.

Are you scared now?

You have never frightened me. I could take on ten of your kind.

Mr. Chairman, it would have been strange if the Opposition had not moved this amendment. From their arguments as regards previous clauses, we know what their standpoint is in respect of the abolition of appeal to the Supreme Court. We should therefore have expected the hon. gentlemen to come forward with this amendment.

If I have to summarize, I can say that in my view the objections are concerned with two matters—firstly, that the grounds for review are actually being narrowed and limited, and, secondly, that there is a remittal of the case by the court of review to, let us call it, the functionary, the committee in this case, that has to give a decision once again. In connection with the objection in respect of the narrowing or limiting of these grounds, I want to put it this way, namely that the Supreme Court possesses an inherent power to review all actions irrespective of their nature. This power of review is referred to as the common-law review. This is done because the power is not granted by Statute, but because we derive it from our common law. Hon. members opposite referred to certain legal grounds, and I want to quote something in this regard. I am going to quote here from a legal opinion which I obtained from our law advisers. They say (translation)—

Then they go on to give the reason for it. They say—

What are you quoting from?

This is a legal opinion which I received from our law advisers in connection with this matter. I asked them to inform me about it.

Is it a document that was submitted to the commission?

No, it was not submitted to the commission. As far as this is concerned, there is therefore no restriction on the grounds for review as is being suggested by hon. members opposite.

In regard to the second matter, the remittal to the functionary, the law advisers have this to say—

Then there is a quotation of Prof. Wiegers. He says—

As far has this is concerned, too, it is the customary and accepted principle which is being introduced in this clause as well. Another matter I just want to refer to is that in law any person who feels aggrieved has the opportunity of going to the Supreme Court directly after the giving of the decision by the committee. Then the principle of the application of internal remedies comes to mind, to determine whether all internal remedies have in fact been exhausted. Therefore I cannot see why hon. members opposite have raised these objections. However. I can understand why they have certain objections when I listen to the hon. member for Wynberg. He accepts that the chairman of this appeal body is going to be an irresponsible person, that it is going to be a beneficiary whom we are going to draw from political circles, and that his actions are going to be irresponsible. Sir, he himself no longer knew what he had to talk about, and then he chose for himself a chairman and a member on this side and showed us how irresponsibly those two persons would act. Really, the hon. member should not, for want of discourse, come forward with that kind of argument.

Sir, I have indicated in brief that from a judicial angle our view in respect of this clause is right; that we have no narrowing of the grounds for review here; that it is an accepted principle to refer the matter back to the functionary again, and that, if a person feels aggrieved, he has the opportunity of going directly to the Supreme Court should all other internal remedies then have been exhausted.

Question put: That the subsections stand part of the clause, upon which the Commitee divided:

AYES—86: Albertyn, J. T.; Aucamp, P. L. S.; Badenhorst, P. J.; Barnard, S. P.; Bodenstein, P.; Botha, G. F.; Botha, J. C. G.; Botha, L. J.; Botha, M. C.; Botha, P. W.; Botma, M. C.; Clase, P. J.; Cronje, P,; Cruywagen, W. A.; De Beer, S. J.; De Jager, A. M. van A.; De Klerk, F. W.; De Wet, M. W.; Diederichs, N.; Du Plessis, A. H.; Du Plessis, B. J.; Du Plessis, G. F. C.; Du Plessis, G. C.; Du Toit, J. P.; Engelbrecht, J. J.; Erasmus. A. S. D.; Greeff, J. W.; Greyling, J. C.; Grobler, M. S. F.; Grobler, W. S. J.; Hartzenberg, F.; Hayward, S. A. S.; Hefer, W. J.; Herman, F.; Heunis, J. C.; Horn, J. W. L.; Janson, J.; Janson, T. N. H.; Kotze, G. J.; Kotzé, S. F.; Kotzé, W. D.; Krijnauw, P. H. J.; Kruger, J. T.; Le Roux, F. J. (Brakpan); Lloyd, J. J.; Loots, J. J.; Malan, G. F.; Marais, P. S.; Maree, G. de K.; McLachlan, R.; Mulder, C. P.; Munnik, L. A. P. A.; Niemann. J. J.; Nothnagel, A. E.; Otto, J. C.; Pienaar, L. A.; Pieterse, R. J. J.; Potgieter, J. E.; Potgieter, S P.; Rall. J. W.; Reyneke, J. P. A.; Rossouw, W. J. C.; Schoeman, J. C. B.; Terblanche. G. P. D.; Treurnicht, A. P.; Ungerer, J. H. B.; Uys, C.; Van den Berg, J. C.; Van der Merwe, H. D. K.; Van der Spuy, S. J. H.; Van der Walt, H. J. D.; Van Heerden, R. F.; Van Rensburg, H. M. J.; Van Tonder, J. A.; Van Wyk, A. C. (Maraisburg); Van Wyk, A. C. (Winburg); Van Zyl, J. J. B.; Venter, A. A.; Viljoen, P. J. van B.; Vilonel, J. J.; Volker, V. A.; Vosloo, W. L.

Tellers: J. M. Henning, N. F. Treurnicht, A. van Breda and C. V. van der Merwe.

NOES—40: Aronson, T.; Bartlett, G. S.; Baxter, D. D.; Bell, H. G. H.; Boraine, A. L.; Dalling, D. J.; Deacon, W. H. D.; De Villiers, J. L; De Villiers, R. M.; Enthoven (’t Hooft), R. E.; Fisher, E. L.; Graaff, De V.; Jacobs, G. F.; Lorimer, R. J.; McIntosh, G. B. D.; Miller, H.; Mills, G. W.; Murray, L. G.; Oldfield, G. N.; Olivier, N. J. J.; Page, G. W. B.; Pyper, P. A.; Raw, W. V.; Schwarz, H. H.; Slabbert, F. van Z.; Streicher, D. M.; Suzman, H.; Van Coller, C. A.; Van den Heever, S. A.; Van Eck, H. J.; Van Hoogstraten, H. A.; Van Rensburg, H. E. J.; Von Keyserlingk, C. C.; Waddell, G. H.; Wainwright, C. J. S.; Webber, W. T.; Wiley, J. W. E.; Wood, L. F.

Tellers: T. G. Hughes and W. M. Sutton.

Question accordingly affirmed and amendment dropped.

Clause put and the Committee divided:

AYES—86: Albertyn, J. T.; Aucamp, P. L. S.; Badenhorst, P. J.; Barnard, S. P.; Bodenstein, P.; Botha, G. F.; Botha, J. C. G.; Botha, L. J.; Botha, M. C.; Botha, P. W.; Botma, M. C.; Clase, P. J.; Cronje, P.; Cruywagen, W. A.; De Beer, S. J.; De Jager, A. M. van A.; De Klerk, F. W.; De Wet, M. W.; Diederichs, N.; Du Plessis, A. H.; Du Plessis, B. J.; Du Plessis, G. F. C.; Du Plessis, G. C.; Du Toit, J. P.; Engelbrecht, J. J.; Erasmus, A. S. D.; Greeff. J. W.; Greyling, J. C.; Grobler, M. S. F.; Grobler, W. S. J.; Hartzenberg, F.; Hayward, S. A. S.; Hefer, W. J.; Herman, F.; Heunis, J. C; Horn, J. W. L.; Janson, J.; Janson. T. N. H.; Kotze, G. J.; Kotzé, S. F.; Kotzé, W. D.; Krijnauw, P. H. J.; Kruger, J. T.; Le Roux, F. J. (Brakpan); Lloyd. J. J.; Loots, J. J.; Malan, G. F.; Marais, P. S.; Maree, G. de K.; McLachlan, R.; Mulder, C. P.; Munnik, L. A. P. A.; Niemann, J. J.; Nothnagel, A. E.; Otto, J. C; Pienaar, L. A.; Pieterse, R. J. J.; Potgieter, J. E.; Potgieter, S. P.; Rall, J. W.; Reyneke, J. P. A.; Rossouw, W. J. C.; Schoeman, J. C. B.; Terblanche, G. P. D.; Treurnicht, A. P.; Ungerer, J. H. B.; Uys, C.; Van den Berg, J. C.; Van der Merwe, H. D. K.; Van der Spuy, S. J. H.; Van der Walt, H. J. D.; Van Heerden, R. F.; Van Rensburg, H. M. J.; Van Tonder, J. A.; Van Wyk, A. C. (Maraisburg); Van Wyk, A. C. (Winburg); Van Zyl, J. J. B.; Venter, A. A.; Viljoen, P. J. van B.; Vilonel, J. J.; Volker, V. A.; Vosloo, W. L.

Tellers: J. M. Henning, N. F. Treurnicht, A. van Breda and C. V. van der Merwe.

NOES—40: Aronson, T.; Bartlett, G. S.; Baxter, D. D.; Bell, H. G. H.; Boraine, A. L.; Dalling, D. J.; Deacon, W. H. D.; De Villiers, J. I.; De Villiers, R. M.; Enthoven (’t Hooft), R. E.; Fisher, E. L.; Graaff, De V.; Jacobs, G. F.; Lorimer, R. J.; McIntosh, G. B. D.; Miller, H.; Mills, G. W.; Murray, L. G.; Oldfield, G. N.; Olivier, N. J. J.; Page, B. W. B.; Pyper, P. A.; Raw, W. V.; Schwarz, H. H.; Slabbert, F. van Z.; Streicher, D. M.; Suzman, H.; Van Coller, C. A.; Van den Heever, S. A.; Van Eck, H. J.; Van Hoogstraten, H. A.; Van Rensburg, H. E. J.; Von Keyserlingk, C. C.; Waddell, G. H.; Wainwright, C. J. S.; Webber, W. T.; Wiley, J. W. E.; Wood, L. F.

Tellers: T. G. Hughes and W. M. Sutton.

Clause accordingly agreed to.

Clause 42:

Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment—

Quiet frankly I do not think that the hon. the Deputy Minister should have the slightest compunction or difficulty in accepting this amendment. The first line of the clause reads—

In my opinion it is far too wide in the use of the term “influence”. Influence can consist of many aspects. A person may be influenced by the night that he has had; perhaps he has not slept well. Perhaps he has a slight ailment. Perhaps he has caught a cold. Perhaps he has read something which may influence him. Perhaps he has had a chat over a drink with a friend. These factors may to some extent influence him. The term is a very wide one indeed and. I do not think it is a satisfactory reflection of what is expected of society with regard to its reaction to any matter which may come before a committee or be taken before an appeal board. The clause as it stands would leave the public wide open to almost daily breaches and contraventions of the provisions of this clause and the liability to be prosecuted. It may mean that the writer of any comment in a newspaper of the most general nature, who may be completely unaware of what is taking place in regard to a publication, could be subject to prosecution for the contravention of this clause.

This has been recognized in many fields, but particularly with regard to the admissibility of a confession, for instance. I have found a case in our law reports which indicates the extent to which influence can go and how narrowly the question of influence must be interpreted. In fact, it deals only with influence in the sense of undue influence. There is no case which we know of in our courts, right throughout the whole history of evidence in this country, where the term “influence” stands alone as a factor which should be taken into account in any respect, with regard to the admissibility of evidence, with regard to the admissibility of a confession, with regard to any aspect of our juristic system. The adjective that forms part and parcel of this particular word is “undue” or “unduly”. Whether it is used adverbially together with a verb or as an adjective because it qualifies a noun, the term “undue” or “unduly” plays an effective and important role. Perhaps I can quote to the hon. the Deputy Minister from the South African Law Reports. 1965 (2) at page 401, where a statement is made by an acting Judge of Appeal, Mr. McDonald, who says—

This indicates the restrictive application even of the term “undue influence”. One can therefore realize how wide the term “influence” standing on its own really is. The learned judge goes further—

One can therefore see how important it is that the term “undue” should be used in conjunction with the word “influence”, and even in that respect there has to be something improper that has to motivate the undue influence before our courts will regard evidence as being inadmissible. My appeal to the hon. the Deputy Minister is therefore a very simple one. It is not a new matter. In fact, it is probably quite a trite legal matter. If one had the opportunity to make a more detailed study of the law of evidence, one would probably find that this is so. It is probably a trite aspect of our law that one never finds a wide term such as “influence” being made use of. In respect of the correct term “undue influence”, there remains the most narrow interpretation before it can in any way become effective in respect of the matter to which it refers and on which it must bear. Now, Sir, on page 403 the learned judge goes further and says—

Then he goes on to say on page 404—

So this particular case, which has devoted itself almost entirely to dealing with this matter, is in my view indicative to the hon. the Deputy Minister of how important it is to restrict the application of the term “influence” by means of the adjective “undue”, and further to appreciate how restrictively this matter has to be interpreted. I feel very strongly about this matter because quite clearly the rights of the public, the publishers, the producers, the artists, the sculptors, the writers, the painters and the thinkers already being sufficiently subjected, by the wide ramifications of this Bill, to all sorts of restrictions and all sorts of inhibitions. Now we must certainly ensure that the public itself, either in making comment, or being in any way concerned with what is taking place, does not find itself so inhibited, so restricted, so fenced in, so bound, as to make it almost completely mute in the most vital aspects of education, thought and art, in the life of our country. Standing baldly as it does, this term “influence” can have, I feel, a most corrosive effect on the freedom of thinking, of speech and of expression in our society. I am sure that is not what the hon. the Deputy Minister would like to see. Misguided as he must be generally, I am sure he is not so misguided as not to appreciate the importance of the point I wish to make. I would like to tell the hon. the Deputy Minister furthermore—and I say this very sincerely—that his law advisers have had more time, Sir, than was unfortunately available to me in this rather busy session, to study the matter more fully, because there are other cases on the subject. Unfortunately I could not find sufficient references in the library at the time to an edition of the Criminal Procedure Act with the various annotations which would perhaps have given me greater opportunity to read more of the cases. I have spent quite a bit of time on this as it is, and I would recommend it.

Business interrupted in accordance with Standing Order No. 23.