I just want to say that I have given an undertaking when the House meets after the Easter recess, we shall not deal with contentious matters on the first day. We shall continue with the Order Paper as far as possible, as it is before us now. except that Order of the Day No. III, the Coloured Persons Education Bill, and the Slums Amendment Bill will not be taken on that day. We will keep to the Order Paper as far as we possibly can with the exception of the two Orders that I l ave just mentioned. I have also given the undertaking that we will not deal with contentious legislation to-day although members will notice that the Coloured Persons Education Bill, which now appears to be quite contentious, is still on to-day’s Order Paper. I left it there because I had to draw up the Order Paper before supper last night. I had hoped that the Committee Stage of the Bill would have been almost completed and if there had been only a few clauses left, we could have dealt with them to-day if they had not been of a contentious nature. But that does not appear to be the case and therefore, if it is in order for me to do so—if it is not, I shall do so later—I want to move that Order of the Day No. III for to-day, stand over until Order of the Day No. II has been disposed of. May I move that now?

No.

In connection with Order of the Day No. IV, Slums Amendment Bill, which also appears to be rather contentious, I have agreed with the Opposition Whips that the Minister will make his introductory speech, that the member of the Opposition who replies to him will then move the adjournment of the debate and that we will accept it. If we make reasonable progress I hope that we shall be able to adjourn the House before lunch.

This is the clause which deals with compensation. I listened with care to what the hon. the Minister said yesterday, and I appreciate that possibly he could not say more than he did. The conditions under which compensation is paid, and what may be taken into account or not, are provided for in the principal Act. I merely want to put this point to the Minister, that where compensation claims may arise, may I take it that we will have a sympathetic attitude from the Administration and especially from the Minister? I know there are cases where appeals go to the Minister himself from time to time, where people feel that an injustice has been done to them. Could we have a statement from the hon. the Minister to the effect that he will adopt a sympathetic attitude in those cases? Then I would be satisfied.

The part of this clause that I wish to deal with is in sub-clause (b). This clause makes provision for a new area of prescription to operate in respect of legal proceedings under this Act, and it provides that in respect of any loss or damage sustained by reason of any other power contained in this Act, that is to say other than expropriation, the year in which the action will become prescribed shall, in terms of Section 64 of the principal Act, i.e. the Railway and Harbours Control and Management Act, No. 70 of 1957, run as from the date upon which the power was first exercised. Sir, this is a very extraordinary remedy that is provided in the law; it is in fact a limiting of the rights of individuals to claim their due under the law, and it goes so far as to extinguish the rights of individuals to claim loss or damage which they have sustained because of the negligence of the Railways or because of some other unlawful act of the Railways if a period of a year has elapsed. What is proposed in this clause is that the date from which that year shall run—that is to say, a date is set and a year after that all rights in respect of that action are extinguished in respect of the act complained of—shall be the date upon which the power was first exercised. The clause purports to make the beginning date the date on which the power under the Act was first exercised. I think the experience of all those who have been connected with actions of this kind—and one finds a similar sort of prescription in the local authority ordinances throughout the Republic—is that in certain cases this provision has proved very unfair to the individual. I want to give the hon. the Minister an example of an excavation—and of course the Railways do a great deal of excavation—which causes a subsidence, a subsidence which occurs gradually. What happens if the subsidence is unknown to the engineers concerned? All sorts of things happen when an excavation is made. A subsidence will occur and spread towards a building, and very often one is not aware of the fact that the subsidence is going to affect one’s building by undermining the foundations, for example, or by cracking one’s wall, until very long after the first act of excavation was in fact made. The difficulty with this clause as it now stands is that the year will begin to run when the power was first exercised, that is to say when the excavation was first made, and it may well be that the subsidence which undermines the building may take a year to progress to the building, and it might take a year before anyone is aware, all these things happening underground as they do, that damage to the building has in fact occurred as a result of that excavation. In terms of Section 2 of the principal Act, Act 70 of 1957, many powers are provided in connection with excavation. Sec. tion 2 (10) provides for the power to enter upon land and make excavations. In those circumstances I think it would be fairer and I think it would meet the case which the hon. the Minister has in mind—it would still provide a period of prescription—if the words “such powers were first exercised” were replaced by the words “such loss or damage became apparent. Inasmuch as the object of prescription in relation to the Railways is not to leave an action of this kind hanging in the air for ever, the acceptance of this amendment would still limit the period of prescription to a year, but it would be a year after the owner became in fact aware of it or a year after anyone might reasonably be expected to have seen that the subsidence or the act complained of caused the damage. In those circumstances I hope the Minister will be able to accept the amendment which I now move—

I have not had an opportunity of studying this amendment yet; I only received it a few minutes ago and I do not therefore know what the implications might be if I accepted it, but something that immediately occurs to one, however, is this: It is quite possible, if the amendment is accepted, that five or six or seven years after the railway line had been built, a subsidence might occur. It would mean then that an action for damages could be instituted five or six or ten years after the line was actually built. I think that would be quite impracticable. It might even take 20 years, and there would be no effective control. It would have to be established after all these years whether the damage was in fact caused by the construction of the line. It seems to me that that would be quite impracticable. However, I will get my Department to go into the full implications of this matter and if it is at all possible to meet the member I can always introduce an amendment in the Other Place.

In the circumstances I ask the leave of the Committee to withdraw my amendment.

With leave of the Committee the amendment was withdrawn.

Clause put and agreed to.

Remaining Clauses and Title of the Bill put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

I move—

I must apologize for not having replied to the hon. member for South Coast (Mr. D. E. Mitchell). I can give him the assurance that all claims for compensation will be sympathetically considered. I am a farmer myself and I know what it means to have some of your land expropriated. The attitude has always been, as I said at the second reading, to treat claims for compensation sympathetically. As the hon. member knows, it seldom if ever happens that a case is taken to court. A settlement is usually arrived at by way of negotiation.

I move—

That the Bill be now read a second time.

As hon. members know, the Government set out to solve the housing problem in the country and to make suitable accommodation available by means of State assistance to all families which cannot afford to make provision for such accommodation out of their own pockets. With this object in mind, loans to the value of R301,068,456 for the building of 291,342 houses have been made available as follows: Whites—R144,570,981 for 37,993 houses; Coloureds—R31,106,962 for 31,212 houses; Indians—R10,659,622 for 7,327 houses and Bantu—R114,730,891 for 214,810 houses.

In spite of the fact, however, that these enormous sums of money were made available, and in spite of the generous loan facilities made available, we still find that unsightly slums disfigure many of our towns and cities, slums which not only undermine the health of a large section of the population but also lead to a waste of manpower which is so indispensable to the development of a country. I want to say in the first place that representations have been made to me to give consideration to the possibility of amending the term “slum”. We have gone into this question very thoroughly and after careful deliberation it has been decided not to interfere with that term because “slum” means something rather more than simply “agterbuurt” or “krot” and has a rather different meaning. I want to refer to the Slums Act of 1934 in which the following definition of “slum” appears—

These are more or less the conditions under which a slum may arise. But I just want to add that a slum may arise in an apparently decent building if one room in that building falls within this definition.

When regard is had to the fact that these conditions arise in spite of the fact that the Slums Act of 1934 (Act No. 3 of 1934) has already been on the Statute Book for nearly 30 years, it is clear that there is something wrong somewhere and that the time has now come for positive steps to be taken not only to achieve the aims of the Slums Act but also those of the Government—that all the inhabitants of the country should be properly housed. We now propose to take those steps in terms of the Bill before the House.

The main purpose of the Bill is to reorientate and improve the machinery created for local authorities in the Slums Act of 1934 to enable them to perform the functions imposed upon them in terms of that Act, that is, to obviate or to prohibit unsatisfactory conditions within their areas of jurisdiction and as far as practicable to ensure that suitable housing is provided for the inhabitants of their areas so that the aims of that legislation can be achieved either by steps taken by the local authorities themselves or, where local authorities fail to comply with the requirements, by the Department of Housing.

Up to the present time the principal Act has been regarded as part of the country’s health legislation—partly I think because the question of housing was formerly the task of the Ministry of Health—and in carrying out this task therefore the emphasis was placed on the health aspect rather than on the housing aspect. It appears now, however, that if the emphasis is placed on the last-mentioned aspect, and suitable accommodation is provided, it will also be possible to a very great extent to find a solution for the health aspect.

The proposed amendments therefore envisage a positive approach in terms of which, particularly where slums arise, those slums will be cleared and be replaced by suitable housing schemes. Because the provision of housing is a matter which is part of the task of the Ministry of Housing and the Department of Housing, it is only logical that the ministerial powers granted in terms of the Slums Act, 1934, should be transferred to the Minister of Housing. Provision is made for the transfer of these powers in Clause 1 of the Bill. The mere transfer of the administration of the Act from the Minister of Health to the Minister of Housing, without also extending the powers of the Minister in respect of its administration, would unfortunately not have the desired effect in view of the fact that the powers given to the Minister in terms of the Act are of such a nature that he would not be able to take any positive action, he would merely serve, as in the past, as an appeal authority under certain circumstances, as is provided for in the original Act. Nothing could be achieved with such an amendment, and it is necessary therefore to create powers which will make it possible to take positive steps. My attitude, however, is that local authorities who do wish to take action—and for whom we have the greatest appreciation—to combat undesirable conditions in their areas should be affected by the new provision as little as possible. The powers of local authorities to take action themselves are not being tampered with at all therefore and, as in the past, local authorities will be able to take steps of its own accord to remove any undesirable conditions in its area of jurisdiction.

Moreover, the removal of these conditions need not cost local authorities or their taxpayers a single cent because they can borrow money at sub-economic and economic rates of interest from the National Housing Scheme not only for the purchase of land but also to provide new housing schemes on that land. Indeed, in this connection it may be mentioned that since August 1962 local authorities have been informed repeatedly by way of departmental circulars and in interviews that the Government desires unsatisfactory housing conditions to be removed wherever they occur and that it will make the necessary money available for this purpose for both economic and sub-economic housing schemes in such a way that a local authority or its taxpayers need not contribute one cent because the State itself will provide subsidies in respect of economic housing as well as money from the National Housing Fund for the provision of services such as water, electricity and so forth.

Where a local authority, with all these facilities at its disposal, is nevertheless loath to take positive steps to remove these undesirable conditions in its area, then the matter cannot be left at that, in view of the policy of the Government that every family must be provided with suitable accommodation as quickly as possible. Therefore, if a local authority cannot or is not prepared for some reason or other to take steps itself, it must be possible for another body to act in order to remove these undesirable conditions and to make suitable housing available.

Provision is therefore being made in Clause 21 of the Bill for the Secretary for Housing, with the approval of the Minister of Housing, to exercise the powers of a local authority in such a case, but as I have already said, these powers will only be used where a local authority is not able or prepared to take the necessary steps itself. In Clause 22 provision is also made whereby at any stage of the proceedings the Secretary for Housing may surrender any of his powers in favour of a local authority if that local authority decides and undertakes to take the necessary steps itself. There can therefore be no question of unreasonable interference with the powers or functions of a local authority.

A further new principle is being inserted in Clause 3 of the Bill, a principle which ought to be generally welcomed, and that is the establishment of a slum clearance tribunal consisting of a district magistrate or an ex-magistrate and two other suitable persons with particular knowledge of this subject to hear actions instituted in terms of the Slums Act and to make findings and issue orders with regard to premises. As I have already said the establishment of this tribunal ought to be welcomed. Not only does it relieve the city council of an unpleasant duty but it also completely removes the question of slum clearance from the local political arena and it might well result in action being taken more freely. If the position is left as it is, it may well happen that interested groups may oppose the clearance of slum conditions. The duration of proceedings will also be considerably shortened because where necessary such tribunal will be able to give its full-time attention to the case until it has been disposed of. For these reasons I am convinced that the establishment of an impartial slum clearance tribunal—to which no greater powers are being given than those which have hitherto been enjoyed by a local authority—will be supported by all parties who may become involved in cases for the hearing of which this tribunal has been established.

Finally, a new principle is contained in Clause 23. In terms of this clause the National Housing Commission is given the power, with the written authorization of the Minister, to acquire slum land or land bordering on slum land or situated in close proximity, either by agreement or expropriation, if that land is needed in connection with the provision of alternative suitable housing and if the area has to be cleared in terms of the Slums Act.

These then are the new principles contained in this Bill. All the other proposed amendments are of a consequential nature and are merely designed to adapt the sections, which are being amended by these few clauses, to the new principles contained therein or to present-day circumstances and legislation which has been adopted since the principal Act was last amended in 1937.

I have now dealt fairly fully with the key clauses and for the information of hon. members I should like to deal with their aims in a little more detail.

Clause 3 inserts a new Section 3bis in the principal Act, in terms of which a slum clearance tribunal is established to replace local authorities as the bodies which have to consider reports from the medical officer of health and decide whether or not the premises dealt with in the report have to be declared to be slum and what steps the owner has to take in order to remove the undesirable conditions. This slum clearance tribunal will consist of the district magistrate or a retired magistrate and two members appointed by the Minister because of their knowledge of urban housing and health conditions. This tribunal, which will not be able to act without legal guidance in view of the fact that a magistrate or ex-magistrate will always have to preside, can only be regarded as an improvement upon the existing legal process. Furthermore, it will not be possible to make accusations of political interest or lack of impartiality against such a tribunal and its findings because it will have no interest in local matters and will have to consider every case purely on its merits. Furthermore, the staff who have to serve the tribunal, the public and the local authorities, will be officials of the Public Service and will therefore have no interest in local conditions either.

In clause 20 provision is made whereby work which has already been done will not fall away. It has come to my notice, however, that a great deal of work that has already been done may fall away if this Bill comes into operation at short notice. At the Committee Stage therefore I shall move an amendment in terms of which the Act will come into operation on a date which will give local authorities the opportunity, by issuing the necessary orders, to proceed further with cases which they have already taken to the slum declaration stage but in respect of which they have not yet issued orders with a view to slum clearance. It will then be possible to regard such cases as cases which have been properly dealt with by the slum clearance tribunal itself.

Clause 21 is also one of the key clauses and provides that when the Minister of Housing is doubtful whether a local authority is fulfilling the obligations imposed upon it in the Slums Act, he may in respect of the whole or part of a local authority area authorize the Secretary for Housing by notice in the Gazette to perform all the duties and functions of such a local authority in order to achieve the aims of the Act.

In view of the fact that the Secretary for Housing too is dependent upon an expert report on properties before he can exercise the powers granted to him, the Bill also provides that the Regional Director (State Health Services) or a person authorized by him may carry out investigations in this connection and submit a report on his findings to the Secretary. The Bill itself still refers to the district surgeon as the person who can undertake such an investigation. After very careful consideration, however, I have come to the conclusion that the Regional Director (State Health Services) and the staff under his control, which for all practical purposes may also include district surgeons, will be best able to render the necessary services. At the Committee Stage therefore I propose to move an amendment in terms of which the Regional Director (State Health Services) or an official designated by him will be substituted for “district surgeon”.

From the nature of their office these officials are no less capable than the medical officer of health of a local authority. The same procedure therefore has to be followed by the Secretary that has to be followed by a local authority. In this case too, therefore, there can be no objection to the proposed provision or to the procedure which has to be followed.

Because the granting of powers to the Secretary to act in removing slum conditions can only be applied in cases where local authorities fail to do this work themselves, provision is being made in Clause 22 to ensure that the Secretary and the local authority do not both take action in regard to the same premises.

This clause also provides that any action already taken by the Secretary in terms of the powers granted to him may be suspended and the matter again handed over to the local authority if necessary. There is no better proof than this provision that the aim of this Bill is not to interfere with the powers of local authorities but merely to achieve the objects of the Slums Act.

Clause 23 gives the same power to the National Housing Commission to acquire slum land as that enjoyed by local authorities. The reason for this is that the Secretary must also be enabled to make a positive contribution not only by having premises declared to be slum areas but also, where possible, to have suitable housing provided on land that has been declared to be a slum area. This is the logical rounding off of any action taken by the Secretary to promote the policy of the Government that every family must be provided with suitable accommodation.

In recommending this Bill to the House I want to give hon. members the assurance that its aims are not to detract from the existing powers and functions of local authorities; it merely seeks to achieve the desired aims and to ensure that the policy of the Central Government is implemented and that the unsightly slum conditions which exist in and around more than one of our cities and towns are removed as soon as possible and that suitable accommodation is provided as soon as possible for those persons and families who of necessity have to live under those conditions at present because there is no better accommodation available for them or because they cannot afford better housing.

Mr. Speaker, not only do I regard it as a pleasant duty and privilege for this House and for the Government and for the country to tackle this problem but I think that throughout South Africa we are united in this respect. This is a declaration of war on slum conditions. That is why we are entitled to the support of every South African who has the interests of our country at heart. We believe that this Bill will enable the Government and the State and local authorities to take the necessary action in this regard.

I think it will be agreed that the question of slum clearance is one of great importance from whatever angle you view it. Slums are things which we all deplore and we should like to see them cleared up from every point of view; from a social, economic and even political point of view they are a menace to-day.

I am not sure that I did not detect a slight note of criticism in the speech of the hon. the Minister of our local authorities on whose shoulders have rested the duty of slum clearance. I want to say that the local authorities, whether they wished it or not, have necessarily had to use the instruments provided by law for dealing with slums, such as the Slums Act, the Public Health Act and the laws dealing with building, etc. Those laws were there whether they liked it or not. If there has been circumlocution and if it has appeared that they have been dilatory the fact is, Sir, that the proof of the pudding has now been found in the eating when the Minister has come with this Bill because he will not use the existing laws. He has come with a measure which is designed to streamline the whole operation because he finds that the existing instruments are too slow, inadequate and incapable of allowing him to deal with the problem as fast as he would like. I do not necessarily blame him for that, Mr. Speaker, but I merely want to say that the fact that the Minister has come with this Bill shows that he is satisfied in his own mind that the existing legislation is not adequate for his purposes. The local authorities are not in the happy position of being able to come to Parliament from time to time when they wanted streamlined legislation. They had of necessity to use those laws which we have placed on the Statute Book.

I do not want to take the matter any further than that at the moment. We would like to study what the hon. the Minister has said. We can discuss this Bill at a later stage, but I want to assure the Minister that in principle there is no desire whatever on the part of this side of the House to see a perpetuation of the slum conditions which he himself has expressed as being so anxious to clear up.

I move—

I second.

Agreed to.

I move—

Mr. Speaker, this is a small Bill which hon. members will find is not contentious. I have tabled an explanatory memorandum and hon. members will have had an opportunity of studying it so as to find out what the aims of the Bill are. Hon. members will see that the main objects of this Bill are threefold. Firstly, to give a wider definition of the term “machinery” in order to cover a wider range of potentially dangerous apparatus.

Secondly, it makes better provision for accident prevention in building and excavation work. Thirdly, it provides for the issue of certificates of competency to factory engineers in terms of the Factories Act instead of under the Mines and Works Act as has been the practice heretofore.

Hon. members will observe that the emphasis in this Bill is essentially on safety. Experience has shown us that the present regulations which have enabled my Department to reduce substantially accidents in industry are not practicable enough to cope with modern developments in the technological sphere. This has been causing us concern for a long time and we decided eventually that we should overhaul all the regulations and more particularly those concerned with the welfare and the safety of the individual worker.

New regulations relating to machinery as well as building and excavation work are in the process of being drafted after full consultation with all the interested parties. These regulations are considered to be priority number one but unfortunately they cannot be promulgated in terms of the existing Act as it stands to-day. There is not sufficient power. The approval of hon. members is now sought to enable the Department to proceed with the new regulations so as to keep abreast of modern developments for safety and the prevention of accidents. It may interest hon. members to see the draft regulations which I have here. It is an immense volume of 212 foolscap pages. Hon. members will realize how important this subject is. If any hon. member is interested I shall have great pleasure in letting him have a copy of these draft regulations.

In order to enable hon. members to understand the Bill I shall deal briefly with the salient clauses. In Clause 2 (a) it is proposed to amend the existing definition of “machinery” by including pressure vessels and portable gas containers. Hon. members will know that accidents occur quite frequently where pressure vessels or gas cylinders explode causing loss of life or injury to persons. We consider it essential that safety measures in connection therewith should now be prescribed. The present definition of “machinery” include apparatus under steam pressure but no other type of pressure vessel, for example, air receivers, inter-cool vessels, etc., or portable gas containers. The terms “pressure vessel” and “portable gas container” are defined in the new machinery regulations to which I have referred and which are ready for promulgation. Safety measures in connection therewith are also prescribed and unless the items are included in the definition of “machinery” in the Act, we shall not be able to promulgate these regulations.

Clause 2 (b): Hitherto explosives factories have been controlled under the Mines and Works Act and it is proposed to amend that Act so as to exclude “explosive works” therefrom. They will therefore automatically revert back to the Factories Act where they really belong. Danger areas of explosives factories are, however, not factories and should be controlled by the regulations under the Explosives Act. It is therefore proposed, under this clause, to exclude from the definition of “machinery” the danger areas of explosives factories.

Clause 2 (c): The proposed amendment widens the existing definition of the word “user” to the extent that structures and plant which are not machinery as such but which are used in connection with the activities in which machinery is used are also now included in the definition. In terms of the present definition “user” means the owner of or the person benefiting from the use of machinery. This, Mr. Speaker, is entirely inadequate as the following case will illustrate. A case occurred in Cape Town some time ago where a crane was used to lift pieces of iron into a tank containing acid. An employee fell into the tank and he died as a result of his injuries. The user was prosecuted under regulation 51 for failing to fence or to protect a dangerous place, that is the tank. The magistrate held that in view of the definition of “user” the accused was not guilty as the tank was not machinery as defined. It is therefore absolutely essential if safety measures are to be effective that the duty and the responsibility of users should not be confined to machinery only but should also be extended to plant, structures, etc., used in connection with any machinery. The proposed widening of the definition of “user” is regarded as essential in order to ensure the effective application of the regulations dealing with safety.

Clause 4: In terms of Section 31 of the Act any period during which an employee undergoes peace training under the Defence Act of 1912 shall be deemed to be in employment for the purposes of annual leave. It is now proposed to bring this into line with the Defence Act of 1957, but in view of the fact that ballotees and volunteers undergo military training for a continuous period of nine months in their first year, it would be unreasonable to expect employers to regard that full period as employment for leave and incremental purposes. It has therefore been decided to limit the period to four months in each period of 12 months.

Clause 5 of the Bill seeks to substitute an entirely new chapter for the existing Chapter V. The existing chapter provides for certain safety measures to be taken by builders in connection with building and excavation work, and the provisions can only come into operation in areas determined by the Minister in the Government Gazette. No areas have ever been so determined and no regulations have been made in terms of the existing Chapter V, with the result that the provisions are not only inadequate but they are also so rigid as to render them practically useless—or at least, I should say non-adaptable to the ever-changing techniques in the building industry.

The new chapter provides that an inspector may prohibit a builder from proceeding with any building or excavation work until he has complied with all the appropriate regulations. The required regulations are at present being drafted in consultation with all interested parties and will be promulgated as soon as possible after this Bill before the House has become law.

Clause 8: In terms of Section 43 a notice under the Act may, inter alia, be served on the occupier of a factory by means of an entry in the factory register. The proposed amendment provides for the serving of notices on “users” in a similar way and also by means of entries in the prescribed boiler or elevator inspection register. The proposed amendment merely facilitates administrative procedure.

Clause 9 (a): The existing Section 51 (1) (j) provides that regulations may be made as to the manner in which supervision by inspectors of the use of machinery shall be exercised and the proposed section provides that building and excavation works shall also now be included.

Clause 9 (b): This amendment is consequential on the replacement of Chapter V of the Act, and will enable the State President to make regulations as to what a “competent person” is and what prescribed classes of work that person may perform.

Clause 9 (c): The proposed additions to Section 51 (1) (t) provide an enabling clause to permit of the making of regulations in respect of certificates of competency and the related fees and to draft a set of regulations parallel to those under the Mines and Works Act. The existing Regulation 31 under the Factories Act makes provision for the appointment of certificated engineers in general charge of all machinery where the installed horsepower of such machinery exceeds a prescribed limit. A “certificated engineer” is defined as a person who holds a mechanical or electrical engineer’s certificate of competency recognized for the purposes of the Mines and Works Act. The certificate referred to is issued by the Government Mining Engineer on the recommendation of a commission of examiners appointed by him. In effect all engineers employed in factories are required to pass an examination on the Mines and Works Act and Regulations when, in fact, they have no experience of such Act and Regulations; they do not study and write an examination on the Factories Act and Regulations in terms of which they are to be appointed and the requirements of which are their constant responsibility. The necessary powers are thus now being sought to establish a certificate of competency for factory engineers.

As hon. members will see these amendments are of vital importance in our campaign to prevent accidents and to preserve life. To show hon. members how serious this problem in fact is, I should like to draw their attention to the fact that during 1961 a total of over 12,000 persons were injured in accidents which were reported to my Department. Of this number over 600 cases, i.e. over 5 per cent, were in respect of accidents in connection with building and excavation work. Of a total of 192 persons killed in all accidents during that year, i.e. 1961, 51 or 26 per cent of the fatal cases were in connection with building and excavation work. It is also clear from the annual accident figures that only the more serious accidents in building and excavation activities are reported and that many more than the 600-odd persons mentioned are probably injured annually in connection with building and excavation work. Bearing in mind the total number of persons killed and injured annually in such activities, I do not think there can be any doubt that it has become urgently necessary to give special attention to the prevention of such accidents. To achieve this purpose the proposed legislation which will enable us to prescribe the required safety measures by way of regulation is now placed before this hon. House for approval.

This is a very necessary Bill to enable the Department to keep abreast of the ever-increasing new techniques and development in our factories generally. The hon. the Minister has indicated that the main provisions of the Bill seek to bring about a greater factor of safety in the operation of all types of plant and machinery throughout the Republic. The emphasis which the Minister has placed in this Bill on the essentiality of safety is one which has our approval. We support this Bill because we realize how necessary it is.

But there is one aspect which I think the hon. the Minister will have to explain further to this House so that we will be in a better position to deal with it in the Committee Stage and that is the amendments in Clause 9. The Minister has indicated that the qualifications required by personnel who are appointed to be in charge of certain factories are tied up with the requirements of the Mines and Works Act and that it is necessary for such persons to be examined in terms of the Mines and Works Act regulations. The first question I wish to put to the Minister is this: Does it mean that once this Bill becomes part of the Act and the very voluminous regulations which the Minister has shown us become law, that all those engineers, who have gained a certificate of competency in terms of the Mines and Works Act, will have to sit for a further examination to enable them to qualify in terms of the Factories Act and the regulations framed thereunder? It is a very important issue, Sir, as you will appreciate. There are many factories in the country under the control of engineers who have at the moment their certificates of competency. But as the Minister has indicated, that certificate of competency does not cover the regulations which are now going to be promulgated in terms of this Bill or the regulations in terms of the original Act. If it is going to become necessary for all those who at present have a Government certificate of competency to write a further examination on their knowledge of the regulations framed under the Factories Act, the Minister will realize that that will require an enormous amount of study. What will be the position in the interim period, from the time this Bill becomes law until the time those engineers acquire those qualifications? Will they have to get the necessary qualifications or does the Minister not intend those who are already qualified to undergo a further examination in terms of the regulations which will now be part and parcel of their duties as authorized engineers in factories?

The Minister has also indicated that he will make the regulations which he has ready for promulgation available to us. I think it will be essential for us to avail ourselves of that offer so that we will be able to appreciate whether in fact the hon. the Minister is in all respects taking steps in the interests of safety. If it is the intention that there is to be a lesser certificate, a certificate which will not be as difficult to obtain in terms of these regulations, then the question of safety comes into it. The Minister will readily appreciate that all the regulations in the world are not going to be effective if the persons in charge of enforcing those regulations in so far as the factory is concerned are not as fully competent as they should be. The question arises here as to whether the new examination is going to be of less value than it is at present. I am not now referring to the new set of regulations. It is a question of whether the examinations which are held by the technical colleges before a person can qualify are going to be continued to be held or whether the curriculum will be changed in any way and that it will make it easier for persons to get a Government certificate of competency in terms of the regulations which we have not as yet had an opportunity of examining.

I raise this matter because the Minister will appreciate that a course can be taken to-day at technical colleges by anyone who desires to be competent to control a factory. In other words, he does write an examination which entitles him to be appointed in charge of a factory although he is not a fully qualified engineer. In other words, he gains a Government certificate of competency. It is in that regard that I should like the Minister to give us a little more information. It does appear from what the Minister has said that the certain regulations under the Mines and Works Act are going to be transferred holus-bolus to the present Factories Act. It appears, therefore, that there is not going to be a change in the regulations governing the qualifications required for a person who is going to be in charge of building plant and machinery in any factory. I think we should be quite clear on this issue because it is obvious that in order to obtain a Government certificate of competency from a technical college, in view of the new circumstances, will require a change in the syllabus which is to-day prescribed for such students. I assume that the Minister has had discussions with the educational authorities in that regard. I think it is important that wide publicity should be given to the changed circumstances which will arise once this Bill becomes an Act of Parliament and the regulations are promulgated. There are many students busy qualifying at the present time in terms of the existing position. They will have to change their plans somewhat so that they will qualify in terms of the new regulations.

I am not going to deal with any other points. We can deal with the other issues at the Committee Stage. I only mentioned this now so that the Minister will have an opportunity, before we get to the Committee Stage, of getting the information which will enable him to give the Committee the necessary information so that the Committee can judge whether the safety factor is going to be maintained as a result of the new proposed examinations for Government certificates of competency.

Like the last speaker, I am not going to raise any question about the necessity for this legislation or the value of the safety factor that will be derived from its coming into operation. As the hon. Minister in his introductory remarks rightly said there have been a number of occurrences which have pointed to the urgent need for some modernization, some bringing up to date of sections of our safety controls in this regard, and the Bill, I think, goes quite a long way towards meeting that necessity.

There are one or two points in respect of which I hope the hon. Minister in his reply will give us some further information. It may well be that they have already been dealt with in the somewhat voluminous report on the regulations referred to by the Minister but which I have not had the opportunity of studying, but they are important points which need consideration. I want to refer particularly to the sections referred to by the Minister, Clauses 2 (a) and 3 dealing with the pressure gas “containers” or “cylinders” and the question of defining them as “machinery”, thus bringing the user under control of conditions applying to the users of “machinery” in the more generally accepted sense of the word. The hon. Minister, I am sure, will be well aware of the tremendous spread all over the country in the last couple of years of the use of certain domestic types of cooking apparatus, refrigerators and hot-water producers. All sorts and types of domestic apparatus, particularly in the country areas, removed from the benefits of electricity or the normal type of gas supplies, are a tremendous boon to the population and also in the urban areas where there are literally tens of thousands of items of this kind of equipment in use to-day. Some of it of a very large type in the way of refrigerators and household stoves, but all of them dependent in some shape or form on either a self-contained gas container down to as small as a 2 lbs. container, in the case of the smaller type of apparatus, where liquid gas is used as opposed to the ordinary type of gas (but equally potent for danger), and in other larger cases on portable cylinders ranging up to 40 or 50 lbs. of gas. All of them have a tremendously dangerous potential if not properly used. If under the definition now proposed all this apparatus is to be classed as machinery, tens of thousands of ordinary domestic kitchens, and practically every caravan in the country will automatically fall under the definition of being a factory or a building which houses machinery and the safety laws applying to such buildings or factories in the generally accepted sense of the word will have to apply to them. It would make tens of thousands of housewives in the country in terms of the new legislation users of this type of machinery, and subject to this new control. I do feel that although some danger exists, special attention must be given to this particular factor, so as not only to avoid depriving the nation of the advances of what is undoubtedly a modern trend which is a most valuable development for domestic use, but also provides facilities which in certain country areas are unobtainable by any other means. Practically every caravan to-day carries a cylinder or a type of gas container of some sort for use with this portable gas. Its lighting and all its domestic appliances fitted in the caravan operate from that gas container. In your home apparatus you can get the small pressure cookers in which the base itself is the container in which the gas is contained, and you also get the larger types apparatus where you have a portable container or cylinder which is attached to the particular piece of apparatus you are going to use, and again being used for storing the gas for lighting as well as for the ordinary range of domestic appliances. To deal with the supply of gas a system has developed, and here I think there is room for considerable attention on the part of the Minister’s Department to see that safety regulations are indeed carried out, a system, or rather two systems have developed in regard to the recharging of cylinders for the owners of these apparatus. In the case of the smaller type of article, it can be taken direct to a depot or an agent of the particular manufacturer and it is recharged there, in cases I have seen myself under conditions which leave quite a lot to the imagination when you consider safety regulations. I think there is room for considerable improvement in that direction, which would automatically pass on its value in added safety to the user of the apparatus. The other system is that used by certain companies for equipment of their make. Once the cylinder or container is empty, you simply take the cylinder, or in some cases the complete unit, back to the manufacturer’s agent or depot where you hand in the empty one, and you are handed a fresh container, recharged, and which is understood to have been checked and examined by the firm in question. Under those conditions, you receive or should receive it devoid as far as it is possible of any factor of danger. I would suggest, if it has not already been done, that these aspects also be considered in regard to the domestic gas appliances, because they do have a big bearing on the ultimate factor of safety in the house itself. But there is the other factor, and it is one unfortunately in connection with which probably one of the worst accidents in this area occurred. Whatever the Bill may do, with the best intentions in the world, you there come back to the human factor. There was one case where an electric stove top was used as a table-top on which to stand a gas cooking apparatus, standing it on a hot-plate which was switched on—well, the end is inevitable: It simply becomes a boiler and you build up pressure until an explosion occurs, with unfortunately very shocking results. How you are going to guard against that human element I do not know. But I do think that attention must be given to it, if it has not already been done may be by some form of definition in the regulations that the hon. Minister has before him. Attention must be given to the growth of the usage of this type of equipment from a purely domestic point of view, as completely distinct say to the backyard factory where a gas cylinder is used for commercial purposes, for small odd jobs of work. Whilst the safety of the inmates of a domestic building is no less important, there are other considerations which have to be taken into account in the case of these household appliances. From experience in the usage of these things, I would make the suggestion that there are two ways—they may again have been dealt with in the Minister’s regulations—in respect of which something might be done to lessen the danger risk. The one is by the fitting of some adequate safety release valve which would automatically function if circumstances develop to cause an increase to a dangerous pressure, for instance where it is being stood on a hot surface and you generate both the steam as well as the added gas pressure in the cylinder—an automatic safe release forming part of the equipment itself, a safety device such as is fitted in many cases on the better class of ordinary blowlamp that an artisan uses; when he pumps up too high a pressure or the container gets too heated, or the gas pressure gets too strong, the safety valve is forced open at a certain pressure and the danger is avoided. Many of these types of apparatus have no such safety fittings. The other thing is by better control over conditions under which the containers themselves are refilled, to make sure that they are not overcharged. They are filled from a gas cylinder which naturally has to have a higher pressure than the appliance, and I have seen them being filled under circumstances where there is no indicator, no sort of regulator or gauge indicating the pressure that is being put into the container being recharged. These are thoughts that occurred to me in connection with these particular clauses because as they stand they can create quite a lot of difficulty in the domestic life of the country if the proposed definitions are accepted. And, as I say, apart from the ordinary domestic life standpoint, you have also the caravan development which, as the Minister knows, is assuming tremendous proportions of national importance, these gas appliances are a fundamental portion of the equipment of a caravan and are essential to the comfort of the people in the caravan.

I am indebted to the two hon. members who have spoken on this Bill. The hon. member for Umhlatuzana (Mr. Eaton) has raised a question of some merit with regard to the examinations of engineers, and I can give the hon. member the assurance that I will go into that matter very closely before the Committee Stage of this Bill is taken, and I hope then to give him a full reply which will reassure him that there will be no prejudice to engineers who have already embarked upon their course or those who qualified under the Mines and Works Act, and may now have to qualify under the Factories Act. That position will have to be clarified. There is considerable merit in the case put by the hon. member.

The hon. member for Simonstown (Mr. Gay) has also raised a very interesting question. We know of course that there has been considerable expansion in the use particularly of portable gas containers, and the use of cylinders in caravans and homes. But I do not think, Sir, that domestic apparatus falls under “machinery”, as we will probably find in the regulations when I have delved into them before the Committee Stage. A domestic apparatus only becomes machinery where an accident takes place in order to enable our inspectors to go in and investigate the causes of the accident. That is when it becomes subject to the regulations. I was just looking at these regulations, paging through them, and I see that there are provisions in respect of safety valves and similar devices to be affixed to certain apparatus, but as I say when we come to the Committee Stage I will be in a much better position to give the hon. member the fullest information as a result of an investigation which I will have made, and I will then also have an opportunity of going through these regulations myself. That will keep me busy during the recess. I will go through the regulations and prepare myself to give a full reply to hon. members when we resume on the 17th. I thank hon. members for their support of the Bill.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I move—

This is a little Bill which has already been passed by the Senate, if not with acclamation at any rate with complete agreement. In 1950, we had a Land Surveyors’ Registration Act and certain unforeseen difficulties have since then arisen as a result of certain clauses in that Act, and we are now attempting here to improve the position. Mr. Speaker, the land surveyors are a very reputable body of gentlemen in South Africa who have managed their own business for a very long time, and in the various Acts in regard to the registration of land surveyors we have always attempted to give them more and more powers for the regulation of their own affairs. There are four provincial bodies, representing each of the provinces, and we have a Central Council of Land Surveyors, and the first difficulty which has arisen, has arisen with regard to the way of electing members of the Central Council of Surveyors. The Central Council of Surveyors is a very important body in the profession because it has to do in the first place with the registration of all qualified land surveyors, who can only practise if they are registered by the Central Council of Land Surveyors. Their other function is, and this is a function for the protection of their fellow-land surveyors, to uphold the good name of the profession and, also very important, the protection of those people who have to employ land surveyors and that is that they have certain disciplinary powers which they can enforce upon practitioners who do not follow their respective code. Now I will first deal with the election of members to the Central Council. This Central Council consists of seven members; two are appointed by me, and the present incumbents are the Director-General of Surveyors and the Surveyor-General for the Transvaal; two are elected by the Institute of Government Land Surveyors in the Cape, one for the western half of the Cape, and the other for the eastern half of the Cape; one by the Institute of Government Land Surveyors of Natal; one by a similar body in the Transvaal, and one by the land surveyors normally practising in the Free State. These different bodies are constituted in different manners. In the Cape, the Transvaal and Natal, they are statutory bodies, in the Free State it is not a statutory body. That is why I said that they are elected by land surveyors normally practising in the Free State, because they have no statutory body. In the Transvaal and Natal, again membership is compulsory, whereas in the Cape it is not compulsory, and in the Free State it is not compulsory. In the Transvaal and Natal members are elected to the central body not by all the land surveyors voting, but are actually appointed to the central body by the executive of their local organization. In the Cape and in the Free State again they are elected by ballot by all the members registered as members, by actual voting. This has become a very expensive and rather useless form of electing. Elections for the central body occur every two years. They have a complicated system first of all of getting nominations, and then the various land surveyors have to be notified who have been nominated, and then voting papers have to be sent to them, and it has turned out to be a very costly procedure indeed, whereas in the Transvaal and Natal it is simplified by the fact that the board which is elected by the land surveyors appoints these members to the Central Council. What we propose to do in this Bill is to apply in the Cape and the Free State the procedure which is being followed successfully in the Transvaal and Natal, and in that way we will save them a considerable amount of trouble and expense.

Clauses 4 and 5 allow the council to fix the fees for registration; it also allows them to fix salaries and subsistence allowances for its members. But although they are allowed to do this, any changes which they make in travelling and subsistence allowances or in registration fees have to go through the cumbersome procedure of being gazetted in the Government Gazette. It is now proposed that this will not be necessary, but they shall be notified through the secretaries of their organizations.

The central body has a chairman and this chairman has a considerable amount of work to do and he requires to employ secretarial assistance to do this work. It is now proposed that the Central Council shall have the power to grant him an honorarium for the work which he does and for the expense he has in employing secretarial help.

Then there are the old land surveyors, who are generally known in the profession as the “over-70s They still fulfil a very useful role in their profession in that they can do the calculations, but it is not possible for them to climb the mountains which land surveyors usually have to climb. Now they pay a smaller registration fee than the others, and now it has been brought to their notice that this is probably ultra vires and we want to condone that so that they can pay a smaller registration fee, because they are not able to do all the work.

Another point has arisen. If a registered land surveyor fails to pay his fees, it has never been clear when he ceases to be registered, and we want to make provision now that if a land surveyor fails to pay his normal fees, after three months he will cease to be registered as a land surveyor.

Clauses 6 and 7 deal with a difficulty which has arisen and that is as far as disciplinary action may be taken by the Central Council against one of its members. If this member of the profession feels that the Central Council will be successful in its disciplinary action against him, he immediately resigns as a land surveyor, and then the machinery which has been put in motion against him must stop according to the Act as it is now. Then when everything has died down, he comes back and automatically re-registers himself and practises a considerable time while they are building up the machinery to take disciplinary action against him once more; and just when they are ready to do this, he resigns again, and he goes on playing cat-and-mouse for practically as long as he wants. What we are now allowing the council to do is that they may conduct an investigation into any land surveyor whether he is registered as such or not, because according to the Act as it stands at present, he resigns and ceases to be registered and then no steps can be taken against him. Now we are given the power to obviate this cat-and-mouse game which has been played by some. If a man is found guilty of some action which necessitates disciplinary action to be taken against him, he will not be able to obviate or escape the decision of the council by resigning, and the council will then also be able to take a man’s name off the register for a certain period, an indefinite period or a fixed period, but where a man resigns and he comes back after a time, they will also be able to say: A certain period must elapse before you can be registered again. In other words, they can take disciplinary action against this man who was guilty while he was registered, but resigned to escape the consequences of his misdemeanour.

There is one other point in regard to 6 (b). Under the Land Surveyors’ Act, where a land surveyor is guilty of improper conduct which in the opinion of the council renders him unfit to practise as a land surveyor, I myself, as the Minister, may apply to the courts by way of motion for the suspension or cancellation of the right of such a surveyor to practise. But as the Act was altered some time ago, I may now alternatively apply to the council or hand in a complaint to the council and the Council of Land Surveyors can investigate the case and they have the power under the Act as it is at present to deal with such person and to punish him. Now I can either go to the court, if the complaint is brought to me, or I can go to the council, and for practical purposes it is much easier to go to the council. It saves a considerable amount of expense, both for the Government and for the person who is indicted, but the council which is a poor body has to bear the expense, and it is found that generally in such investigations the cost to the council to investigate a matter which I have referred to them involves them into about £500 of costs. Now what we do here is that if I hand in a complaint to the council for investigation, the Government will pay half the cost of such investigation. I think that is fair and equitable. They have asked for it, and I think it should be done. The other amendments in the Bill are merely consequential.

The hon. the Minister has given us a very clear explanation of the aims of this Bill and because these amendments have been asked for by the land surveyors themselves, and because the Institute of Land Surveyors, as it indicated to the hon. member for Gardens (Mr. Connan), has no objection to this Bill, we on this side of the House intend to support the hon. the Minister. The whole Bill amounts to this, that a larger measure of self-government will now be given to this body. They have handled their affairs in a most capable manner up to the present, and since they now ask that certain changes be made in the way in which members are appointed, in respect of certain technical points in regard to offences that may be committed by land surveyors and in connection with the payment of registration fees, this side of the House has no objection to this Bill.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I move—

Since this is a consolidating measure, the Opposition will support it.

Bill read a second time.

I move—

Agreed to.

House in Committee:

Clause 2 put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported with an amendment made by the Select Committee in Clause 2.

Amendment in Clause 2 put and agreed to, and the Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

I move—

The Bill makes provision for the establishment of a pension fund scheme for officers and employees of certain institutions or bodies which receive subsidies or grants-in-aid from the State.

At present these officers or employees are by law required to become members of either the University Institutions Provident Fund or the Technical Colleges Provident Fund, that is of providents funds administered by my Department. Members do not receive a monthly pension from these provident funds when they retire. They are only paid a lump sum.

Some of these institutions, especially the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and the Bureau of Standards, have from time to time made strong representations for the establishment of a pension fund scheme which will provide for the payment of monthly pensions to their employees.

Other State-aided institutions such as museums and libraries, the officers or employees of which are members of the Technical Colleges Provident Fund, are also in favour of the establishment of such a pension fund scheme for their employees.

In this connection I may state that in 1959 I appointed a departmental committee to inquire into certain matters affecting the University Institutions Provident Fund.

This committee consisted of—

1. (1) Mr. C. F. Odell, Deputy Secretary for Social Welfare and Pensions who was chairman of the committee;
2. (2) Professor W. G. Sutton, representing the Committee of University Principals;
3. (3) Dr. S. M. Naude, representing the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and all allied institutions;
4. (4) Mr. G. M. Gain, representing the Government Actuaries;
5. (5) Mr. J. B. Wood, Chief of the Civil Pensions Division, Department of Social Welfare and Pensions; and
6. (6) Mr. J. A. Erasmus of the Department of Education, Arts and Science.

The committee was therefore representative of all the parties who had an interest in the matter.

The committee was asked, inter alia, to make recommendations as to the advisability of substituting for the Provident Fund, a new scheme designed to meet more adequately present-day conceptions of provident and pension schemes.

The committee accordingly asked the Government actuaries to submit for consideration a suitable pension scheme framed on up-to-date pension principles.

After careful consideration of the scheme proposed by the actuaries, the committee unanimously decided to recommend its introduction.

This is the scheme which will be incorporated in the regulations to be made in terms of Clause 2 of the Bill.

I may mention that the report of the committee was referred to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, the Bureau of Standards, the Atomic Energy Board and the other non-university institutions the personnel of which are at present members of the University Institutions Provident Fund, as well as to State-aided institutions the personnel of which are admitted to membership of the Technical Colleges Provident Fund.

These institutions have intimated that they support the establishment of the new pension fund scheme.

It is a sound scheme which compares favourably with other similar schemes in the country. It will mainly provide for the payment of a monthly pension plus a single cash payment to a member on retirement, or to his widow or minor children on his death.

Members of the new pension fund will contribute at the rate of 8 per cent of their pensionable emoluments in the case of male members and at the rate of 7 per cent in the case of female members. Rand for rand contributions will also be paid to the fund by the institutions and by the State on the basis at present applicable in respect of the University Institutions Provident Fund and the Technical Colleges Provident Fund.

The moneys of the pension fund will be deposited with the Treasury and will be invested by the Public Debt Commissioners in Government stock.

As in the case of the University Institutions Provident Fund and the Technical Colleges Provident Fund the new pension fund scheme will be administered by my Department.

The additional cost to the State in connection with the new pension fund scheme will therefore be comparatively small.

The institutions or bodies, whose officers or employees will become members of the new pension fund scheme, will be known as associated institutions. In this connection I would refer hon. members to the definition of “associated institution” in Clause 1 of the Bill.

In terms of Clause 3 of the Bill persons appointed to the service of an associated institution on or after the date of establishment of the new pension fund scheme will be required to become members of that fund. Such persons will no longer be permitted to become members of either the University Institutions Provident Fund or the Technical Colleges Provident Fund.

Persons who are in the employ of associated institutions on the date of establishment of the new fund and who are members of either the University Institutions Provident Fund or the Technical Colleges Provident Fund will be given the right to elect to become members of the new pension fund. If they do not elect to become members of the new fund they will remain members of the relevant provident fund.

Should they elect to become members of the new pension fund the amount standing to their credit in the provident fund concerned will be transferred to the new fund. They will not be required to pay any additional amount in respect of prior contributory service.

Hon. members will also observe that in terms of Clause 4 it will be possible to declare any institution, organization or body which has been established by or under any law but which is not an associated institution as defined in the Bill, to be such an institution. The employees of the institution concerned will then be able to participate in the new pension fund scheme.

In conclusion I would state that the regulations which will be framed in terms of the Bill will be referred to the various institutions for their comments before they are promulgated.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this side of the House I wish to say that we support this Bill in principle, because when we look at the long title it says that it is to provide for pensions for the employees of certain institutions and other incidental matters. Therefore with that principle in mind we naturally support this Bill. There are, however, one or two comments we would like to make, and before doing so I would also like to say that in realizing that these institutions which are covered in terms of the Bill are performing a great service to South Africa, they are therefore institutions which require every support in the work they are performing in the important field of scientific research which is so important to the future of our country. We realize, too, that all these research institutes suffer from a shortage of staff and are experiencing great difficulty in recruiting sufficient staff to continue and to extend their field of work. Therefore a provision such as this, which offers security to those persons who do this important research, is important. It is important that adequate provision should be made for them in their old age, because it is an important factor to-day, particularly where there is keen competition for the services of these highly qualified persons who are employed by these institutions. These institutions have to compete with commerce and industry, which often offer most attractive pension schemes. With the principle in mind of making available pension schemes for these people, I think that will in some small way assist these institutions to recruit suitable qualified staff.

It will be seen from the first clause of the Bill that a large number of research institutes will be covered by this scheme. However, various institutes such as the C.S.I.R., the Atomic Energy Board and the Control Board of the Afrikaanse Woordeboek are well known, but there is one institute about which the Minister might give us some information, and that is the Africa Institute, because I have not seen any reports as to the functions of that institute, although naturally we do not object to its incorporation in the Bill. Provision is made for other institutions which may be declared as associate institutions and which can also partake in this pension scheme.

On the question of the existing provident funds, we realize that that is one of the disadvantages of a mere provident fund that a person receives a lump sum, and invariably, or from time to time, some people do not make the best use of that money which should provide for their old age, and in a short time find themselves faced with financial difficulties. Therefore it is pleasing that this Bill allows these persons to belong to a fund where, in addition to a lump sum gratuity, they will also get monthly benefits. However, the one point I would like to ask the Minister about is in connection with those persons who are members of these provident funds and who transfer to this new fund. They can elect to do so, and I presume that in the regulations a time limit will be set within which they must elect to transfer to the new fund. My one difficulty is that some persons might not elect to transfer to the new fund within the specified time and may thereafter realize their folly and wish at a later date to transfer to this fund. I hope the Minister will be able to give some assurance that these people will be accommodated. We know that the Select Committee on Pensions every year considers large numbers of cases where there has been a transfer from one fund to the other, and a member of the old fund decides not to transfer to the new fund and then he afterwards discovers that it would have been to his advantage to do so, and then he has to petition Parliament to sanction it. I hope some provision will be made to facilitate these persons joining the fund at a later date.

The Committee Stage of this Bill, I hope, will be taken at a later stage, because there are certain details which I and, I am sure, other hon. members of this side of the House would like to put to the Minister to gain clarity. But at this stage we have no objection to the principle embodied in the Bill and we have pleasure in supporting it.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to reply briefly to the questions put by the hon. member, and I wish to thank him for supporting this Bill because as I said in my introductory speech it is a good Bill. In connection with the definition of “associated institutions” in paragraph (f), I may mention the following institutes which will be recognized straight away as associated institutions: the Sugar Milling Industry and Research Institute; the Paint Industry and Research Institute; the Leather Industry and Research Institute; the Fishing Industry and Research Institute; the Wool Textile Research Institute. The employees of these research institutes are at present members of the University Institutions Provident Fund. Then there are some 15 bodies which are at present State-aided bodies, referred to in paragraph (g) of the definition clause. They consist of the following: The National Gallery, Cape Town; the South African National Royal Museum, Johannesburg; the National Museum, Bloemfontein; the South African Museum, Cape Town; the Royal Museum, Bloemfontein; the Natal Museum, Pietermaritzburg; the Transvaal Museum, Pretoria; the Voortrekker Museum, Pietermaritzburg; the State Library, Pretoria; the South African Public Library, Cape Town; the National Zoological Gardens, Pretoria; the National Botanical Gardens, Kirstenbosch; the Michaelis Collection, Cape Town; Engelbrecht Huis Collection, Pretoria, and the Humphreys Art Gallery, Kimberley. The Africa Institute will also be included. I can give the hon. member the assurance that his observations will be taken into account in drawing up the regulations.

*As I said, there are various institutions that may still be included. That is one of the reasons why we have decided to lay this down by regulation. This is also the system that has been in operation in other cases for some time, so that from time to time, when anomalies arise, they can be rectified by way of regulation.

The hon. member also asked me about the time limit. Sufficient time will be allowed, but the principle that I have laid down will remain, and that is that all new appointees, after the date of promulgation, will be compelled to join the fund. I think we are all convinced that it is in their best interests to join that fund. But there may be other institutions where the staff may perhaps not be unanimous in this regard. They will have an opportunity of joining if they wish to do so. It will be optional in their case. The point made by the hon. member, as to how long it will remain optional, is something that I will inquire into and I will let the hon. member know at a later stage. The important point is that at the present stage it is optional for these people. New appointees will not be given the option. I want to add for the information of the hon. member that the university institutions, for example, are not included at the moment. We have had long discussions with the university institutions, and if such university institutions decide at a later stage to ask for inclusion, they can then be included. That is why we are making it optional.

I want once again to express my appreciation to hon. members and I trust that the matter will receive careful consideration. Further details will be given at the other stages.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I move—

This Bill has a twofold purpose—firstly to provide by law that the Electricity Supply Commission will have the statutory right to do research into the generation of electricity and to spend money in that regard and, secondly, to make donations to the Atomic Energy Board. From legal advice that has been obtained it appears that Escom does not have these statutory rights at present, and these amendments are being proposed in order to put it beyond any doubt that it does have these powers.

The Atomic Energy Board approached Escom for a contribution of R2,500,000 towards its second five-year plan, payable in five annual instalments of R500,000 each, and because the Atomic Energy Board functions in the national interest the Commission would like to comply with this request. In view of the fact, however, that according to the legal opinion obtained there is no certainty that the Commission has that power, it is desired that the necessary statutory right be obtained before this request is agreed to.

It is true that the Commission as early as in 1959 agreed to contribute R500,000 in respect of the Board’s first five-year plan by way of five annual instalments of R 100,000 each, the first of which was paid in 1959. This step was taken because it was considered to be in the national interest that the Atomic Energy Board should come into operation as soon as possible and because all the members of the Commission were anxious that contribution should be made. The donations are of a recurrent nature but are now reaching considerable proportions. The amendment of the Act in order to give the Commission the necessary power in this regard is therefore regarded as necessary, and the provision in the Act will also have to be of retrospective effect in order to cover the contributions already made.

The two aforementioned aims are being achieved by the addition of two paragraphs to Section 4 (1) of the Act. In order to make provision for funds to meet the expenditure arising from this, it is also necessary to amend Section 16 (2).

In terms of Section 16 (2) separate accounts have to be kept of every undertaking of Escom reflecting the actual expenditure incurred by the Commission, and a fair allocation has to be made to the various undertakings of the administrative and running expenses, the amount of interest and redemption charges and other items of expenditure for which provision is made in this Act.

Escom derives its income from these undertakings and the profits of each undertaking are repaid to that undertaking for distribution amongst its consumers by way of tariff reductions after the expenditure to which I have referred above has been deducted. The subsection creates the impression that the funds which the Commission will need for research and donations to the Atomic Energy Board may also be included with this expenditure and distributed amongst the various undertakings, but the addition to the sub-section is considered desirable in order to put it beyond all doubt that Escom is acting within its legal powers.

Hon. members will note that provision is only being made for donations to the Atomic Energy Board. I want to explain here that the Commission is inundated with requests for donations to bodies of all kinds and it would certainly not be advisable to open the door to all these other bodies by legislation. The Atomic Energy Board functions in the national interest, however, and it can make a direct contribution to promote the aims of Escom. That is why contributions to the Board, as I have already said, are strongly advocated.

Mr. Speaker, this side of the House will support the Bill, but we feel it needs some tightening up. The Electricity Supply Commission is hedged around with regulations controlling its activities and the amount it can charge for electricity. The Minister has dealt with that in part, but I want to point out that the activities of the E.S.C. are so controlled that its reserve fund can only be formed by taking away 3 per cent of the assets, as set out in Section 13, and the uses to which such reserve funds can be put are explicitly stated in the Act. Now the effect of this new Bill is to authorize the E.S.C. to charge up to its various undertakings the research and donations to the Atomic Energy Fund. Obviously there is a relationship between the Atomic Energy Board and the E.S.C. but these donations and the research will now be debited to the various undertakings in certain proportions which will be decided upon. But I do think that some limitation should be placed on the amount that can be donated. I do not like to talk about farmers, not being a farmer, but the effect of this is that if inordinately high donations were made, it could involve farmers, or anyone of these other Electricity Supply Commission schemes, in appreciable additional costs and I do feel that these amounts should be limited. I think that this is important, because there have been complaints—I think the Minister had complaints in the Other Place—that farmers were very worried that they would be forced to bear the whole cost of the atomic energy production of electricity. Of course, that is a ridiculous thought but under this Bill it would appear to be possible. Sir, I think in the interests of everybody, from the point of view of allaying the fears of people that there might be an inordinately high and unjust increase in the cost of electricity, there should be some limitation placed on the amount which can be contributed to the Atomic Energy Board.

I am pleased that the hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Ross) does not strongly insist that farmers will be adversely affected by this Bill. It will actually be the farmers who will benefit by this Bill because it is the farming communities who are situated so far away from coal supply centres, particularly here in the Western Cape, who will benefit when the Atomic Energy Board succeeds in designing economic atomic energy power stations. That is why I strongly support this Bill, especially on behalf of the farming community here in the Western Cape who will benefit a great deal as a result of the research which is to be instituted by the Atomic Energy Board. I am sure that the hon. the Minister will ensure that the donations made will not be so large as to cause the hon. member for Benoni sleepless nights.

The hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Ross) referred here particularly to the fear that this loading may primarily hit the rural consumer, but he himself said that this might sound ridiculous. I am pleased that he mentioned that because it is virtually impossible to impose a loading of this nature just on the rural consumer. I want to point out that the rural consumer—and here I include the smaller towns as well—only uses a very small percentage of the total amount of electricity generated by Escom. The total amount of electricity generated is more than 16,000,000,000 units per annum. Of this amount the municipalities use slightly more than 3,000,000,000, transport more than 1,000,000,000 and the mines more than 8,000,000,000. Therefore more than half of the total electricity generated by Escom is consumed by the mines. Industries use more than 3,000,000,000; the figure for domestic consumption is 247,000 and for street lighting, 6,000,000. The hon. member will see therefore that about 1 per cent of the electricity generated is used by the farmer and the rural consumer. It is therefore a very small percentage. The whole intention is that the donation will be evenly distributed and that they all have to contribute towards it, and if any saving is. effected as a result of the generation of electrical power by means of nuclear energy, everyone will share in the benefit. The hon. member can rest assured that there will be no unnecessary spending of money in this regard. This is essential research that is being done in order to enable us to make use of cheaper electrical power when at some future stage it may appear profitable to do so.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

House in Committee:

Owing to the absence of the Chairman of Committees and the Deputy-Chairman.

resumed the Chair.

House Resumed:

in the Chair.

I move, as an unopposed motion—

I second.

Agreed to.

House in Committee:

in the Chair.

On Clause 1,

I would like to return to this point of the limitation of the amount of the donation; it is not a frivolous objection. There are two points that I want to make to the Minister. Nobody can guarantee that the production of atomic power is going to be cheaper than the present production of electric power, and secondly everybody knows that before the Atomic Energy Commission can get to the stage where it will be producing power economically, colossal sums of money will have to be spent, and the fact remains that under this Bill the Electricity Supply Commission is now entitled to charge out to each individual undertaking a proportion of the donations made, and quite definitely in the public mind, the colossal amount to be expended on atomic energy, plus the fact that that amount is going to be charged to the various Electricity Supply Commission undertakings is definitely causing disquiet. The various undertakings of the Electricity Supply Commission should not have to bear the cost of the investigation of the production, finally, of atomic energy; it should be borne by the country as a whole. Sir, I am not going to suggest any amendment but I do believe that the matter is of importance and should be considered at a later stage. I think there must be a limitation in all common sense.

I want to point out that the Government does contribute its share. Provision has been made in the Estimates this year for a contribution of R580,000 towards this research work. The contribution of the Chamber of Mines is more than R800,000 per annum. This amount is the same as last year’s contribution despite the fact that contracts have been extended and that we are selling less uranium than before. There are certain industrial undertakings which contribute towards the cost of this research. This is research therefore which is in the interests of everyone. It is clear that as the position has now developed, Escom is the one body which probably has the most direct interest in this research and its results. Because Escom has done research in the past and because it now has the opportunity of doing this research on a joint basis, it is in the interests of all concerned that this be done. The fact remains that we cannot do research on an unlimited scale. The hon. member is quite correct; the expenditure in this regard is far too high. The cost of research done in other countries runs into thousands of millions of pounds and it is not possible for us to spend that amount of money. That is why we are investigating certain specific aspects and confining our research to those aspects. The hon. member said that the expenditure in this regard was too high. I said so myself, and the Forsyth Commission which made investigations locally made the same finding, but I have here the latest Fact Sheet of Britain in which it is stated—

We find therefore that there is a general reduction in the cost of the generation of power by means of nuclear energy and it is extremely important that we keep pace with the latest developments and that we ourselves do certain research here. The expenditure here is limited to R500,000 per annum for five years; this amount will be paid over to the Public Debt Commissioners and only the amount of money actually required will be used. The hon. member can rest assured therefore that no money will be wasted.

I appreciate that this donation mentioned by the Minister of R2,500,000, or whatever the figure is, over five years, is limited. That is the present position, but once this Bill becomes law there is no limitation to the amount of money that the Electricity Supply Commission can devote to this purpose. Under this clause those donations, which are unlimited, will then be charged out to the various undertakings. I repeat that there should be a limit. If the Minister says that it is going to be limited to R500,000 a year, well and good, but there should be a limit. Those donations, unlimited, will be charged out to the various undertakings.

Clause put and agreed to.

Remaining Clauses and Title of the Bill put and agreed to.

House Resumed:

Bill reported without amendment.

I move—